Latest posts:
Rate this!
Christine Allen
Member - 2 posts
Hi
I guess the test will be what is "reasonably practicable" to not return to the exact job. Has anyone been involved in this decision making process? If so I would be grateful for examples; I am currently supporting a Snr Mgr in this process and already feeling the effects of 'resistance' to the legislation.
Many thanks.
Rate this!
Christine Allen
Member - 2 posts
Having read all of the comments I think it is clear that we need to review and think about what we are using this type of 'help' for and the dangers of becoming emotive when the reality of facts appear harsh.
Perhaps for the future we could all remember if you are asking for advice and it is given as factual no professional in the HR industry/employment law has underestimated the background emotional issues.
I am the first one to consider the reasons behind 'issues' but as Sarah points out the sickness absence policy and procedures should be properly used to cover genuine absences. All employers should consider the greater picture of why issues like this become an issue and what can/has been done before jumping to the extreme. Poor selection is not an excuse for getting rid of people when things go pear shape whether inside or outside the probationary period.
As a footnote I would urge that if references show someone has a poor absence record this informtaion should be carefully considered, withoout discriminating, before the job is offered. It is too late to shut the stable door etc.
Please I urge everyone to make proper use of this valuable tool before we lose sight of its value to those who may not have a structured path of help within their company.
Thank you.
0 (0)
