Sick on annual leave? Just take some more.

[Osem]

Workers who fall sick during their annual leave are entitled to take corresponding paid leave at a later date, the EU's top court has ruled.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18534028

Another EU inspired burden on business or a jolly good idea?

Difficult. I guess the idea of leave is so you can do things and just relax so it's very unlucky if you fall ill during a day you have off.

[Dai]

Hmmm. Let's think about this for a moment.

Virtually everyone else outside the EU manages to produce goods cheaper and sell them more successfully.

So I'd suggest when we're struggling for 'growth' the very last thing we need is more crippling regulation from the ivory towers of euro dreamland.

Erm - This is pretty much the norm any way. If I was to be on sick leave and it clashed with my Annual leave, my leave would automatically be cancelled and be re-added to my Annual leave allowance.

[idi banashapan]

Same as above. I was able to claim my time back when I was ill on AL a couple of years ago

Yup - standard practice at my place of work.

I can also claim my annual leave back pretty standard practice for the last few years.

Originally Posted by Osem

Another EU inspired burden on business ....

Nope, just normal practice at all the firms Ive worked for over the last 32 years.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Osem

Another EU inspired burden on business or a jolly good idea?

Originally Posted by DaiNasty

Hmmm. Let's think about this for a moment.

Virtually everyone else outside the EU manages to produce goods cheaper and sell them more successfully.

So I'd suggest when we're struggling for 'growth' the very last thing we need is more crippling regulation from the ivory towers of euro dreamland.

Standard practice in virtually every business and has been for as long as I can remember, Europe's ruling is behind the times.

Now just think about it first before any further comments, if you happen to become seriously ill before your holidays why should you lose out on annual leave remember you will have either been to a doctors or the hospital for a diagnosis.

Now if I was off work sick during my holidays my work status would not change from sick to annual leave otherwise I would have some government department asking questions, it is logical when you think about it.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Yup - standard practice at my place of work.

Same here, although I've never taken additional days.

We had a discussion at work about this, and opinion was divided. What if you break your leg while on a skiing holiday? Or twist your ankle while rock climbing? Insurance companies treat injury after risky activities differently, why shouldn't employers?

[Osem]

Well speaking as someone who's been self employed for over 25 years I'm not best placed to comment on what's currently taken for granted in the cushy parallel universe known as employed status. Hence my question in the OP but I bow to all you employees if this case represents nothing new at all and wonder why it's in the news in that event.

Anyway, my understanding of the situation from what I briefly read was that anyone who falls sick whilst on holiday (i.e. during the holiday as opposed to say falling ill beforehand and that carryiing on during what would have been a period of annual leave) can now claim the time back. When I and my late wife were employees I don't recall any such concessions. In fact, in the 1990's, my wife was sadly forced to take a great deal of her annual leave when she was in fact sick for various reasons. Despite being employed by very large and highly respected international organisation there was no question of getting any of it back but of course things may have changed since then.

Whether it's a good thing is not really up to me to say but like so many of the workplace rules we see I can't help thinking that it must add to the burden on business at a time when the economic situation is perilous. Make no mistake it'd be great if employees could enjoy much better conditions and I can certainly see a case for someone who's off sick and can't therefore take the holiday they'd booked to be able to have the time for one at a later date but I also see the inherent problems with that as cited in THeNorm's post.

When we compare the rights our workers already enjoy as compared to those they're competing with in large parts of the world, I must say I cannot see how in the long term many of these can be sustainable even though it'd be great if the economic climate would allow rights to be enhanced.

Originally Posted by Osem

Well speaking as someone who's been self employed for over 25 years I'm not best placed to comment on what's currently taken for granted in the cushy parallel universe known as employed status. Hence my question in the OP but I bow to all you employees if this case represents nothing new at all and wonder why it's in the news in that event.
.

I'm in the same boat as you Osem ,i've been self employed for so many years (at least 25) that i have lost touch of how cushy some employees have things .Reading the article i think it is to draw a legal distinction between paid holidays which is a legal right under the working time directive and paid sick leave which isn't .

[Osem]

Originally Posted by martyh

I'm in the same boat as you Osem ,i've been self employed for so many years (at least 25) that i have lost touch of how cushy some employees have things .Reading the article i think it is to draw a legal distinction between paid holidays which is a legal right under the working time directive and paid sick leave which isn't .

To be fair, all things are relative and I wouldn't swap self employment for the other option (cushy or otherwisep) as I much prefer being my own boss and being able to choose who I do and do not work for.

Yes you could well be right about that distinction. The article isn't very clear is it.

Originally Posted by Osem

To be fair, all things are relative and I wouldn't swap self employment for the other option (cushy or otherwisep) as I much prefer being my own boss and being able to choose who I do and do not work for.

Yes you could well be right about that distinction. The article isn't very clear is it.

damn right

Originally Posted by Osem

Whether it's a good thing is not really up to me to say but like so many of the workplace rules we see I can't help thinking that it must add to the burden on business

Large employers try to wrangle out of paying sick leave and have Absence Management procedures in place. There is also the 'Three days' waiting rule where if an employee is sick for 3 days or less, they simply don't get paid at all. So there is some kind of 'Burden' free practices in place for those people who take the occasional 'Sickie' day.

Most employers have also adopted interesting Absence Management and monitoring. Ever heard of the 'Bradford Factor' ? Where if you cross a threshold after a number of episodes of absence then, you are taken down a number stages that eventually leads to dismissal.

Of course Employers have to be careful and not to prejudice or discriminate against those people who are disabled. Whose disability might temporarily incapacitate them and they take the odd period of sick leave here and there.

The DDA (Disability Discrimination Act 2005), now actually known as the Equality Act post 2010, prevents employers from simply dismissing employees because they have a disability. This doesn't necessarily stop a company from firing a disabled person, they could still do this under 'Capability' but have to show they took steps to make reasonable adjustments.