Sick Pay / Holiday Pay

[MikeB1977]

Hi Guys,

Running a small business with 10 employees. My business has grown very quickly and probably due to this reason I have been a bit lazy with regards to holiday and sick pay.

My sick pay policy has been it is at my discretion wheather or not they get it (ie if they are pulling a fast one, they can have SSP)... but moving forward I think it would be better to have a policy in writing for all to see and understand.

It is my proposal to say to all staff I do not plan to give any sick pay as part of their employment package - however I will give employees the option of using their holiday entitlement to compensate them for their sickness.

In view of the above I would then offer all employees an additional 2 days holiday per annum. This gives any worker who does not have any sickness a reward for having a clean sheet and also workers 2 days buffer for any sick they may have.

Does this sound a good policy?

 

[Bushman]

I will give employees the option of using their holiday entitlement to compensate them for their sickness.

I wouldn't do this. I used to and found employees just phoned in sick whenever they wanted a days holiday. Now we insist on 2 weeks notice for holidays meaning we don't end up short staffed with no notice when they decide on a whim they would like a day off.

 

[mattk]

You may also find that instead of staff having one or two days off sick, they decide to bat through to the end of the week, as only day 3 will be unpaid.

 

[MikeB1977]

Difficult one isn’t it... I understand your points made above but if they going to pull a sicky they will pull one regardless. My view was it come out of their pocket and not mine and also caps my liability to two days per employee.

How many employers give full sick pay these days in any case?

 

[mattk]

I've never worked for a company which didn't offer full sick pay from day one. I guess a lot depends on the company and type of employees.

 

[Bushman]

It depends on what the employment contract says, we only provide SSP so they get nothing for the first 3 days, which usually discourages staff from taking false sickies

 

[Newchodge]

Your proposal is, quite frankly, preposterous.

The right to paid holidays is part of Health and safety legislation, and is intended to ensure that employees have the right to a break from their employment for a certain minimum period of time. If someone is unwell they are not having a proper brek fro m their employment. It also means that employees will not have the faintest idea whether they can book a holiday away, as they won't know if they will fall sick and will have used up all of their 'holiday' in advance.

You definitely need a sickness absence policy. You need one that treats everyone equally and does not give you the opportunity to give advantages to your pets, as your current actions do. It is entirely up to you whether you pay anything on top of SSP. Many employers do, many employers don't.

If you follow your proposal, how much will you pay someone who is on certified sick leave (and therefore entitled to SSP, and then uses their holiday? This sounds to me like the proposal of an employer who wants to get out of paying their SSP obligations.

 

[Mr D]

So rather than 28 days holiday you will be offering 30 days?

 

[MikeB1977]

I am unsure why you think it is preposterous?

Every employee is entitled to SSP.
Every employee is entitled to holiday.

Employees can choose not to use holiday entitlement if they are off sick but instead receive SSP.

I am offering to increase holiday from 28 to 30 days but in turn reduce sick pay from full to SSP.

This method enables me to reward people who have no illness with two extra days off but also gives people full pay for two days if they fall sick.

Further to the comments regarding holiday- I plan to also restrict the holiday use to 1 week per quarter but also two weeks at any one time per year.

You probably think I’m running a dictatorship here but we are a small business and one member of staff off sick or on holiday causes a knock on effect, and trying to manage it as best as I can.

 

[Newchodge]

I am unsure why you think it is preposterous?

Every employee is entitled to SSP.
Every employee is entitled to holiday.

Employees can choose not to use holiday entitlement if they are off sick but instead receive SSP.

I am offering to increase holiday from 28 to 30 days but in turn reduce sick pay from full to SSP.

This method enables me to reward people who have no illness with two extra days off but also gives people full pay for two days if they fall sick.

Further to the comments regarding holiday- I plan to also restrict the holiday use to 1 week per quarter but also two weeks at any one time per year.

You probably think I’m running a dictatorship here but we are a small business and one member of staff off sick or on holiday causes a knock on effect, and trying to manage it as best as I can.

Do you think your employees will all agree to this contract change? If they don't agree, what will you do?

and yes, you are trying to run a dictatorship, which is not the way to get the best from your employees.

 

[MikeB1977]

Do you think your employees will all agree to this contract change? If they don't agree, what will you do?

and yes, you are trying to run a dictatorship, which is not the way to get the best from your employees.

None of them have a contract just a verbal agreement which was I only pay sick at my discretion.

If employees don’t like the terms of employment they welcome to look for work elsewhere. I pay them all exceptionally well - above NMW, have a good work environment and feel that as an employer I should be able to set the terms of employment as I see fit.

Alternatively I can choose not to pay sick (only SSP) and keel holiday at 28 days. Hardly feel the terms are unfair?

If an employee is off for more than 2 days sick I would sooner then not work here to be honest.

 

[Newchodge]

I am offering to increase holiday from 28 to 30 days but in turn reduce sick pay from full to SSP.

A verbal agreement is still a contract. The above quote implies change of contract.

 

[MikeB1977]

Current agreement is at my discretion. Means at my choosing. I could agree to keep “verbal contract” same and agree to no sick pay above SSP unless on new agreement which gives them still the same as what they had before - and more holiday and option to use holiday as sick.

 

[Gecko001]

Current agreement is at my discretion. Means at my choosing. I could agree to keep “verbal contract” same and agree to no sick pay above SSP unless on new agreement which gives them still the same as what they had before - and more holiday and option to use holiday as sick.

It is only an option if you like attending employment tribunals.

 

[MikeB1977]

It’s not illegal for an employee to take holiday when sick? So unsure why this would allow me a free pass to employment tribuneral?

 

[Mr D]

Current agreement is at my discretion. Means at my choosing. I could agree to keep “verbal contract” same and agree to no sick pay above SSP unless on new agreement which gives them still the same as what they had before - and more holiday and option to use holiday as sick.

What you have done is your contract with staff.
At your discretion opens up possibilities if you treat people differently.

 

[Mr D]

None of them have a contract just a verbal agreement which was I only pay sick at my discretion.

If employees don’t like the terms of employment they welcome to look for work elsewhere. I pay them all exceptionally well - above NMW, have a good work environment and feel that as an employer I should be able to set the terms of employment as I see fit.

Alternatively I can choose not to pay sick (only SSP) and keel holiday at 28 days. Hardly feel the terms are unfair?

If an employee is off for more than 2 days sick I would sooner then not work here to be honest.

Oh and you are supposed to give a contract to staff within a timeframe.
Good news for them is you have a problem keeping them to conditions you haven't provided them with.

 

[Gecko001]

It’s not illegal for an employee to take holiday when sick? So unsure why this would allow me a free pass to employment tribuneral?

The problem is that by offering it as an option, this could be construed as your policy or even a term or condition of employment.

Quite often we get threads here where an employee goes on some sort of fantastic holiday without having enough annual leave left. They see it as just too good of an opportunity to miss and go despite their leave situation. When they come back they understandably get the sack. The employee only has themselves to blame in that situation, but if they have used up their holidays when sick at the employer's suggestion, then that could be a different matter.

 

[MikeB1977]

We’ve already established they have a verbal contract- and the contract entitles them to sick pay at my discretion. I am not by law tied to giving them anything more than SSP.

If they do not wish to accept new contracts (written terms) they can remain on the verbal contract they accepted when commencing employment.

I think all staff would agree they would much prefer to have two extra days holiday and option to take sick unpaid and keep holiday.

I am then protected from employees in future taking advantage of sick pay and using it to top up their holiday.

However reading the above comments I think it would probably be wise to scrap it completely and simply replace all sick with SSP.

 

[MikeB1977]

The problem is that by offering it as an option, this could be construed as your policy or even a term or condition of employment.

Quite often we get threads here where an employee goes on some sort of fantastic holiday without having enough annual leave left. They see it as just too good of an opportunity to miss and go despite their leave situation. When they come back they understandably get the sack. The employee only has themselves to blame in that situation, but if they have used up their holidays when sick at the employer's suggestion, then that could be a different matter.

My policy suggestion was that they can take any sick as holiday if they so choose to.

If they have a holiday booked in the future and not enough days left to cover it - they either need to take some time off unpaid and or rearrange a shorter holiday.

 

[Gecko001]

They cannot really take sick leave as holiday leave as sick leave is unplanned leave and holiday leave is planned.

There are many threads on this forum about people throwing sickies. It is disruptive as it is not leave that is applied for and hence planned for by the employer. It is essentially a discipline problem and probably needs to be tackled head on as such.

 

[Gecko001]

My policy suggestion was that they can take any sick as holiday if they so choose to.

If they have a holiday booked in the future and not enough days left to cover it - they either need to take some time off unpaid and or rearrange a shorter holiday.

Taking unpaid leave is something that is done quite often in the USA but not done here very much. I am not unsure whether it is just a matter of differences in culture or if there is a employment law reason for doing this. I suspect the latter.

 

[MikeJ]

If they do not wish to accept new contracts (written terms) they can remain on the verbal contract they accepted when commencing employment.

They have to have written terms and conditions. It's the law.

You really, really need to speak to an employment lawyer to get this sorted, before you get a bill for unfair dismissal.

 

[MikeB1977]

They have to have written terms and conditions. It's the law.

You really, really need to speak to an employment lawyer to get this sorted, before you get a bill for unfair dismissal.

Not in the UK - contracts can be verbal but better if in writing.

 

[Mr D]

Taking unpaid leave is something that is done quite often in the USA but not done here very much. I am not unsure whether it is just a matter of differences in culture or if there is a employment law reason for doing this. I suspect the latter.

Its done here at least occasionally.

Last time my wife was in hospital for a week I took unpaid leave for a week, having used up the last of my leave 2 weeks previous on her release from hospital after a weekend stay.

It can depend on employer. Some may well allow time off with pay in exceptional circumstances. I just take leave for a few days with my current employer when a certain illness happens for my wife.

 

[MikeJ]

Not in the UK - contracts can be verbal but better if in writing.

As I said, you really need proper advice because you don't understand the law.

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3251

 

[MikeJ]

Anyone care to take a bet on their pension situation?

 

[Newchodge]

Not in the UK - contracts can be verbal but better if in writing.

That is true. However an employer is required by law to issue a statement of the main terms and conditions of service within 2 months of an employee's start date. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpg...right-to-statements-of-employment-particulars

That is an extract from the Employment Rights Act 1996.

 

[MikeB1977]

Anyone care to take a bet on their pension situation?

Full pension available which most take and I encourage Mike.

Don’t make assumptions on me or my business without first ascetaing facts. It’s not nice or welcome. If you don’t want to post anything constructive please don’t comment on this thread.

 

[MikeB1977]

That is true. However an employer is required by law to issue a statement of the main terms and conditions of service within 2 months of an employee's start date. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpg...right-to-statements-of-employment-particulars

That is an extract from the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Ok so I’m a little confused. I’m also reading the following from ACAS where it says they do not need to be in writing.

http://m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1577

 

[MikeJ]

Read the fourth point of that link.

 

[MikeB1977]

Point 2 and 4 in my opinion contradict themselves.

In any case - as explained - employment contracts do not stipulate sick pay.... so we are veering a little off topic. It refers to their sick pay being referred to in an employee handbook, etc, etc...

In any case I take all points onboard.

 

[Newchodge]

Ok so I’m a little confused. I’m also reading the following from ACAS where it says they do not need to be in writing.

http://m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1577

That's because you haven't read my post. A contract does not have to be in writing, as I have agreed. But an employer must give an employee a written statement of the main terms of their employment. The law I have quoted above sets out which terms must be included.

Point 2 and 4 in my opinion contradict themselves.

That is because you don't seem to understand that a contract is not the same thing as a written statement

 

[MikeB1977]

Yes point taken - and moving forward I will ensure the terms of their employment are made in writing... however:

The purpose of this post was to ascertain from business owners what their policy on sick was and how my policy fit in with the wider world.

 

[Mr D]

Yes point taken - and moving forward I will ensure the terms of their employment are made in writing... however:

The purpose of this post was to ascertain from business owners what their policy on sick was and how my policy fit in with the wider world.

And a number of us let you know.

 

[MikeB1977]

And a number of us let you know.

I actually disagree- I see a number of posts mainly from the same people but not many employers giving their opinion first hand of their experience with sickness policy.

One of the employers didn’t pay sick pay and the other said he tried it and it failed.
The rest are comments regarding employment contracts and legislation which is off topic from my original question .

 

[Newchodge]

The rest are comments regarding employment contracts and legislation which is off topic from my original question .

as your question was 'does this sound a good policy' they are entirely on topic.

 

[MikeB1977]

as your question was 'does this sound a good policy' they are entirely on topic.

So where does employment contracts come into it? I asked about the policy I am proposing not views on contracts and employment law.

How I implement the policy and it’s legality is irrelevant - Its nobodies business but my own and the law enforcements. I’m only interested in ascertaining views on the policy from people who employ to see its popularity.

In any case any employers with views welcome to comment - the rest can go bash a keyboard on another thread.

 

[Mr D]

So where does employment contracts come into it? I asked about the policy I am proposing not views on contracts and employment law.

How I implement the policy and it’s legality is irrelevant - Its nobodies business but my own and the law enforcements. I’m only interested in ascertaining views on the policy from people who employ to see its popularity.

In any case any employers with views welcome to comment - the rest can go bash a keyboard on another thread.

Sounds like you want any reply that agrees with you.
Ever thought of hiring some yes men? More acceptable response than asking strangers on the Internet.

 

[MikeB1977]

Sounds like you want any reply that agrees with you.
Ever thought of hiring some yes men? More acceptable response than asking strangers on the Internet.

I tried Mr D but we couldn’t agree on sickness policy.

I’m looking for opinions based on the policy given, from employers. Your criticism so far has been on employment contracts and employment law - none of which concerns you or this forum.