Sick on annual leave? Just take some more.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Mick

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.

Very interesting.

Originally Posted by Mick

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.

Originally Posted by Osem

Very interesting.

don't know about you mate but i really don't think i could be arsed with all that

[Wayfair]

We get our holidays back if we go sick during that time, we also have the Bradford Factor, our target, sorry trigger point is 80, it works by totaling the number of days off multiplied by occasions multiplied by occasions, all this leads to is some folk have 4 sick shifts off 'we work blocks of 4' instead of 2 sick shifts off as it's the occasions that get ya..

Originally Posted by martyh

don't know about you mate but i really don't think i could be arsed with all that

If you are self employed and have no employees then you do not need to be arsed with it, start taking on staff and you don't have a choice. Employment law is there to protect yourself, your business and it's employees.

Originally Posted by Mick

If you are self employed and have no employees then you do not need to be arsed with it, start taking on staff and you don't have a choice. Employment law is there to protect yourself, your business and it's employees.

I'm not knocking it i don't have a clue about any of that stuff as i have never worked under those rules , i just couldn't work for a company and be subject to all that regulation ,i just want to go to work and earn a crust with as little restriction and fuss as possible and be responsible ,and take responsibility for my own work or lack of

Originally Posted by Wayfair

We get our holidays back if we go sick during that time, we also have the Bradford Factor, our target, sorry trigger point is 80, it works by totaling the number of days off multiplied by occasions multiplied by occasions, all this leads to is some folk have 4 sick shifts off 'we work blocks of 4' instead of 2 sick shifts off as it's the occasions that get ya..

Someone who has multple episodes of days off, say one day off one week and two days off another and then one more a week later, they will trigger targets which leads to the first stage of action, they will reach this much quicker than say someone who has a full 28 days off (or four weeks) because the 28 full days off are just one episode. Where as the multiple days off are treated as individual episodes and it's a simple form of multiplying the episodes which gives a high score.

The Bradford Factor is there to trap those who take the Mickey and have a poor attendance record. The problem is, the BF can also trap those who are genuinely ill. So it's good for businesses trying to discourage high staff sickness but not so kind on the employee who is genuinely ill.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by martyh

I'm not knocking it i don't have a clue about any of that stuff as i have never worked under those rules , i just couldn't work for a company and be subject to all that regulation ,i just want to go to work and earn a crust with as little restriction and fuss as possible and be responsible ,and take responsibility for my own work or lack of

I thought you now had a job driving for a company if so you are covered the same as everyone else as you are not a special case.

Originally Posted by Peter_

I thought you now had a job driving for a company if so you are covered the same as everyone else as you are not a special case.

I do ,still self employed though

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by martyh

I do ,still self employed though

Do they supply the vehicle if so a bit of a cheat on their side as that is ccutting costs in a major way, if you like the job look for something where you are actually an employee as you will be better off in the long run.

Good luck with it anyway.

Originally Posted by Peter_

Do they supply the vehicle if so a bit of a cheat on their side as that is ccutting costs in a major way, if you like the job look for something where you are actually an employee as you will be better off in the long run.

Good luck with it anyway.

They supply the fuel and the vehicle ,i don't see it as a cheat as there are not deliveries to do all the time so it saves having paid employees and all the baggage that goes with it sitting around waiting for a job to come in .It suits me because i have a regular income and can still do my trade work as and when that comes in.I don't get any sick pay or annual leave or any of the employment protection that direct employees get but i do get the freedom missing from a lot of direct employment

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by martyh

They supply the fuel and the vehicle ,i don't see it as a cheat as there are not deliveries to do all the time so it saves having paid employees and all the baggage that goes with it sitting around waiting for a job to come in .It suits me because i have a regular income and can still do my trade work as and when that comes in.I don't get any sick pay or annual leave or any of the employment protection that direct employees get but i do get the freedom missing from a lot of direct employment

Thats what I see as a cheat as to them you are like casual labour and without all the protection that an employee would have, but that is your choice.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by martyh

They supply the fuel and the vehicle ...

Hmmm...

A self-employed contractor generally provides whatever equipment is needed to do the job ....
The provision of significant equipment (and, or materials) which is fundamental to the engagement is of particular importance. ...where a worker is provided with the necessary equipment, materials and so on by the engager that points to employment.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employment-status/index.htm

Originally Posted by Peter_

Thats what I see as a cheat as to them you are like casual labour and without all the protection that an employee would have, but that is your choice.

It's an arrangement that works well for me and a lot of people ,i do accept it's not a lifestyle for everyone though

---------- Post added at 17:24 ---------- Previous post was at 17:20 ----------

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Hmmm...



http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employment-status/index.htm

Yeah that crops up every few years with every company that uses self employed staff ,basically we just ignore it .No government official is going to tell me how i should be employed ....there's always a way around that load of garbage

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by martyh

Yeah that crops up every few years with every company that uses self employed staff ,basically we just ignore it .No government official is going to tell me how i should be employed ....there's always a way around that load of garbage

It is not garbage but these companies love it that they do not have a static workforce that can can lay off without a second thought especially at lean times of the year, the rules are there for a reason to protect you.

Originally Posted by Peter_

It is not garbage but these companies love it that they do not have a static workforce that can can lay off without a second thought especially at lean times of the year, the rules are there for a reason to protect you.

One of the most restrictive things for any company is having a static workforce that has to be paid regardless of any profit made ,it has been the downfall of many a company ,That load of garbage about employment status is largely meaningless to any boss with an ounce of common sense and assumes that self employed staff actually want to be on the books and are looking for protection when all they want is to be allowed to work when they want and for as long as they want without being shackled by a lot of regulation