In the third of a new series ‘What’s the answer?’ we ask two experts to provide their solutions to your problems; this week Nicholas Snowden, Senior Solicitor at Clarkslegal LLP and Peter Duckitt, HR Consultant present their ideas on how to curb the growth in ‘sickies’.
The question:
What rights do we have as employers to crack down on disciplinary issues under the new disciplinary regulations? We have disciplinary/grievance/appeal policies in place but tend to enforce warnings only after several informal ‘warnings’ have been issued, to give employees opportunities to improve.
Where the conduct is severe, obviously this doesn’t apply and whenever warnings are issued we always ensure that they have the right to be accompanied etc. However, we think that some of our employees are now taking the ‘mick’.
For example some employees have tried to book holiday requests which due to resource/business issues we had to decline. They have then subsequently called in sick on the day that the original holiday request was for.
This has happened on more than one occasion for one particular employee. Other employees that have done this drag their sick days on by another couple of days which we assume has been for authenticity.
Obviously this seems a huge ‘coincidence’ for us and we don’t want the employees thinking that this is acceptable behaviour and we are worried about setting a precedent for others. Equally, how can we challenge people on this when they will just shrug it off and insist that they were genuinely ill? With no proof to the contrary what are our options?
The answer:
Nicholas Snowden, Senior Solicitor at Clarkslegal LLP
The best way to minimise problems of this nature is to have and maintain a motivated workforce, who do not want to take time off. For example, if individuals see opportunities to progress in an organisation, they will not want to damage those prospects with absenteeism.
However, it will be more difficult to create this culture for some categories of employees in ‘dead end jobs.’ Also, there will always be the odd employee who is more interested in what they can get away with rather than what they might achieve by showing appropriate levels of commitment.
In your case, motivational issues may need to be addressed by management. I would also recommend making an announcement by email, or using your organisation’s normal form of mass communication, to let staff know that you have noted with concern a tendency towards increased intermittent absenteeism, particularly when staff are refused particular holiday dates.
Explain that no action is being taken in respect of any past absences, but from now on, staff should be in no doubt that where it appears to management that “sickies” are being taken, disciplinary action may result.
It may also be worth mentioning that this behaviour is regarded with the utmost seriousness by management and, if it is found, on the balance of probabilities to have taken place, it could lead to summary dismissal for gross misconduct.
In this way, no-one will be able to complain that they were not adequately warned of the robust approach which the company would take or the potential consequences of malingering. It should also frighten all but the most diehard malingerers, and prevent the spread of this negative culture of absenteeism. The diehards can then be dealt with through the disciplinary procedure.
Peter Duckitt, HR Consultant
The new procedures do not stop you tightening up on discipline. They only really bite in dismissal situations (or where your behaviour results in someone resigning for constructive dismissal).
My advice is to make clear to everyone that you are concerned about absence levels and, because of this and recent changes in employment legislation relating to disciplinary procedures, you have decided to tighten up on warning procedures.
The best way to tell everyone will depend on your communication procedures and whether or not you are unionised. However, you need to make sure that everyone had been told. One way is via team briefing (if you have them) followed by a letter to everyone attached to payslips and a notice on the notice board.
Whatever you say needs to be clear about what the disciplinary procedure will be and what your view of holidays/sickness absence is, so that no one is in any doubt (do you need to revise your procedure first?)
They also need to be told the date when this will be effective from – you then need to make sure that the changes do actually start from that date. You could also add a paragraph to the holiday and sickness forms spelling out the consequences of substituting a sickness claim for refused holiday.
As important is the need to ensure that your managers understand and “own” the disciplinary procedure, the absence management procedure and the holiday booking procedure. Your managers should view discipline, holiday control and absence management as part of their responsibilities (as opposed to being HR issues).
They need to feel empowered to control them and to understand what they can and cannot do. Just telling your managers will not work – training them is vital – especially in the light of the new, minimum disciplinary and grievance procedures.
It sounds as if you do not have an effective absence control (and return to work) procedure.
HRZone highly recommends that any answers are taken as a starting point for guidance only.
More ‘What’s the answer?’ items
2 Responses
Fair and consistent treatment.
We have a multiple approach to reducing ‘unnecessary’ absence.
Managers set a limit on how many people will be allowed off at any one time. Before booking, employees can see on a holiday planner, how many people are already booked off (no identities given). This encourages people to plan holidays well in advance and deters them from trying to book when the full holiday allocation has already been given. It also means that Managers have to give very little extra explanation when a holiday is refused.
In addition, all employees returning from any absence, have a one-to-one interview with their line-manager. This seems to act as a good deterent for malingering and also gives the opportunity to nip problems in the bud.
We also use the Bradford Factor for calculating absence, which works really well for us.
Employees can alternatively apply for Excused Absence – this is unpaid leave (or can be worked back and paid) booked in advance, not on the day and is intended for hospital/dental appointments but could be used to e.g. attend a wedding when all holidays have been taken. The Excused absence is recorded on the Bradford Factor system but is ‘Bradford exempt’ i.e. is excluded from the calculations.
By combining these four factors, we have very significantly reduced absence in a company which includes manufacturing and shift working – but it is an ongoing issue that needs to be consistently monitored and dealt with fairly and humanely
Maximising flexibility for staff to use leave when they want may
Are refusals of leave for a good reason which is clearly communicated to staff? Maximising flexibility as to when staff can take leave should help reduce sickies, boost morale and help with staff retention. Staff may have very good reasons for wanting to take leave at particular times – for example to attend a special event such as a wedding, or to care for their children during school holidays – and frequent refusals are bound to cause resentment.
Personally I plan my holidays around meetings which are scheduled well ahead, but far enough in advance to arrange other meetings around them. I’ve never been refused a request for leave and I’ve never taken a sickie but if my employer consistently refused my requests for leave I’d be using my leave to seek employment elsewhere!