Skip over navigation

Staff with flu should stay at home, advises HPA

Related content: Staff with flu should stay at home, advises HPA


9.
Nigel Dupree
Member - 1549 posts
10 Jan 2009 10:31AM

Jus need a new policy: " Those employees present but failing to notify management that they are dead will be presumed dead and have their wages payment cancelled and deductions made for any costs associated with removing the body. "


8.
Kevin O'Connor
Member - 2 posts
8 Jan 2009 7:40AM

We have similar problems with people with bad colds (is flu not different?) coming into work spreading their illness to others. The interesting thing here is that we are quite tolerant of genuine sickness and yet when people have been really struggling with a cold, and are spreading it in the office, and have asked to work from home they are told you can ring in sick but cannot work from home when sick even though they are able to when well!!!


7.
Louisa Young
Member - 0 posts
7 Jan 2009 12:42PM

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.


6.
Louisa Young
Member - 0 posts
7 Jan 2009 12:34PM

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.


5.
Nigel Dupree
Member - 1549 posts
7 Jan 2009 8:08AM

Opened up some debate anyway regardless of whether you have been infected by the sick before they actually take their illness home.........

< http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7814770.stm >

Perhaps, just a question of clarity and communication of company policy regarding those presenting themselves 'sick at work' or if there is any preference for them being sick at home ?

My Mum always said "coughs and sneezes spread diseases" and I for one am not about to argue wiv mi Mum as Mum was always right so thats that and all there is about it - in it.


4.
Nigel Dupree
Member - 1549 posts
6 Jan 2009 11:26AM

Facilities Management probably has better planned and routine maintenance shedules for buildings and equipment than Human Resources department has for it's bits of kit.

A good bet that there is no expense spared to get 'broken equipment' up and running again whereas employees just better get on and repair themselves within downtime alotted - bet that makes you feel appreciated and secure !


3.
Phil Baptiste
Member - 27 posts
5 Jan 2009 11:28AM

....and that is quite apart from the fact that, afore the symtoms manifest themselves, that staff memeber could have passed it on already!!!


2.
Graham Jones
Member - 21 posts
1 Jan 2009 11:42AM

The info is fine except where an employer penalises an employee for taking more than 6 days sick per year by the tune of £500 certified or non certified days. How can the sick person not afford to go into work?


1.
Nigel Dupree
Member - 1549 posts
30 Dec 2008 10:42AM

Gotto be better than 33 days a year lost to 20% reduction in performance or productivity associated with presenteeism excluding approx 8 days off with sickie to escape workplace stressors.

And that is without adding in holidays to take it up to 33 + 8 + 20 days leave a grand total of 61 days non-production out of 200 bring effeciency up to 70% !

No wonder gevernment getting worried about well-being and workplace wellness as already recognises UK inc needs to raise performace by 25% to remain competitive on a Global stage.

Perhaps just by reducing the levels of 'collateral damage' to UK human resources in the workplace caused by the 'friendly fire' of omission in duty of care to deal with coercive tick-box cultures and other cultural stressors resulting in loss of production due to presenteeism behind the critical mass of work-related ill-health ..........................


Add a comment


Send me an email-alert when someone comments in this discussion:

Please remember that your name and comment will be visible to all users of the Network, and that we may edit or remove comments without notice. Terms and conditions