HR Update
OVERVIEW
To keep our users informed of the latest developments,
we email monthly updates on developments in HR Law and
practice via email. To subscribe click
here. Click on an article above to view some of the
recent updates.
HR Update - Employment Law Update
Last Modified on: 2009/09/28 16:26
Last Reviewed on: 2009/10/30 15:56
Welcome to September’s HR Update
1. Age discrimination and the Heyday challenge
2. Holidays lost to sickness: new ruling
1. Age discrimination and the Heyday challenge
Last week the High Court upheld the law that allows employers to force employees to retire at 65. The judgement saw the end of the Heyday case, a long running legal challenge brought by two charities, Help and Aged and Age Concern to overturn the right employers have dismiss workers without any redundancy pay at 65; and the right not to hire workers over 65 as long as they stick to the correct procedure. The charities believe this is in breach of the EU's Equal Treatment at Work Directive.
Mr Justice Blake decided that the Default Retirement Age introduced by the government in 2006 did comply with an EC Directive against age discrimination.
However, he did say that there was a 'compelling case' for a change in the law.
The government has announced it is bringing forward a review of the compulsory retirement age, to 2010 and many believe this review will mark the end of this default retirement age. Many of the approximately 800 retirement-related employment tribunal cases, which have been on hold awaiting the outcome of this challenge, may now be dismissed on the basis that it is legal for employers to dismiss workers upon their 65th birthday.
But what is the correct procedure?
The retirement procedure that you should adhere to is as follows:
• between six and 12 months before the employee's 65th birthday, you must notify them in writing of the intended retirement date and their right to request to work beyond their 65th birthday if they would like to
• if the employee makes a request to work beyond their intended retirement date, you have a duty to consider the request and must normally hold a meeting to discuss it with the employee.
• if it is not practicable to hold a meeting within a reasonable period, you must consider any representations made by the employee before making a decision.
• if you wholly or partly refuse the request (you do not have to give a reason for refusal), the employee has the right to appeal against your decision
• the employee has the right to be accompanied at any meeting to discuss their retirement and any subsequent appeal meeting
2. Holidays lost to sickness: new ruling
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that workers who go on sick leave during a period that has been scheduled as annual leave for the purposes of the Working Time Directive should be allowed to reschedule their annual leave days, even if that means allowing leave to be carried forward into a subsequent holiday year. The judgement follows the Pereda case where a specialist driver suffered an accident at work around 14 days before the start of his 4 weeks annual leave. The injury put him out of action for 6 weeks. His sick leave almost entirely overlapped with his annual leave.
The ECJ ruled that his period of sick leave should not have counted towards his holiday time which should be used to rest and enjoy a period of relaxation and leisure, rather than recovery from injury/illness. The ruling suggests that workers who fall ill during a period designated as annual leave may be able to insist on having their leave reclassified as sick leave and their annual leave ‘reinstated’ to be taken at a different time. This principle is likely to apply whether the employee falls sick before or during the actual period of leave.
This raises a question regarding what evidence of illness will the worker be required to produce in order to have their leave reclassified? If the individual has medical evidence showing that they would have been unfit for work then that would surely suffice. But if the worker does not have medical evidence, due to the illness lasting only a few days, or whilst holidaying away from home, will employers be expected to believe the worker and re-instate annual leave? We expect this to be tested in the forthcoming months so watch out for further updates on this topic.
HR Update 154 - Managing Redundancy - The Worst Job In Management
Last Modified on: 2004/02/06 11:53:29 AM
Redundancy
According to recent statistics, one of the major HR issues facing organisations last year was redundancy management.
For a manager, there is only one thing that is more difficult than finding the right staff and that is having to make employees redundant – the worst job in management.
No manager relishes the thought of having to embark on a redundancy programme and few have real expertise in this area.
However, if it is not handled correctly, the uncertainty and rumour around a redundancy programme can affect employees, suppliers and customers which may have a detrimental affect on your Company’s business and its reputation.
Communication is of paramount importance when embarking on a redundancy programme. Clear written and oral communications are absolutely vital if misunderstandings are to be avoided. Consistency must be maintained when explaining the business reasons for redundancies, the selection criteria and the message given to employees in individual interviews.
Clear communications set a positive note to move forward from. They support morale, loyalty and motivation amongst those employees who will remain with the Company. They reduce stress and anxiety helping managers to handle interviews with affected staff more professionally. This in turn reduces the impact on redundant employees, helping them to recover more rapidly and therefore to act more positively.
New Employment Law Regulations to look out for in 2004
Regulations in relation to the minimum wage for homeworkers are due to come into force in April. This will result in an amendment to the National Minimum Wage for Regulations 1999.
Further conditions are due to be introduced as part of the registration process under the Criminal Records (Registration) Regulations 2004.
Various changes to the Disability Discrimination Act Regulations are due to be introduced in October. These will include employers with less than 15 employees no longer being exempt from the Regulations, extension of the Act to sectors which were previously excluded and a change to the burden of proof.
Look out for a more comprehensive updates as the year progresses.
HR Update 153 - Sick Of The Sick-note Saga?
Last Modified on: 2004/01/07 3:46:49 PM
HR MANAGEMENT
Sick Of The Sick-note Saga?
With the New Year now in, many of you will be focusing on new starts, new goals and how you intend to move business forward for this year.
Form some this will mean cracking on with absence management in an attempt to reduce the number of days lost to sickness absence this year.
The debate still goes on regarding GP sick notes and Occupational Health responsibilities. Many believe that GP’s attitudes exacerbate the situation because if they were tougher with their patients, they would be more reluctant to try to ‘pull the wool’ over their employer’s eyes and this would reduce the need for a second opinion from Occupational Health. Those employees with genuine sickness would have nothing to fear!
Putting the responsibility on Occupational Health specialists however, does provide the company with an independent and bias free opinion of the employee’s state of health, which can prove particularly useful, when the GP’s sick note suggests one thing and their reports suggest another!
For the full HR Guide article Controlling Sickness Absence, which provides a full guide to Absence Management, please
click here.
New Year, New Beginning; How Will You Retain Your Best Staff This Year?
This is the time of year when many find themselves assessing what happened last year and what they would, or need, to do differently for this year. Employers will be making plans for their businesses and employees will be making career decisions. With this in mind, how do you make sure that their career decisions remain within your company?
Research shows that there are a number of factors that employees look for in a satisfying job. These include both financial and non-financial incentives such as:
- Good career prospects
- Valued pay rates
- Useful benefits
- Appreciation for their work
- Good levels of support, training and development
- A good work-life balance
- Feeling valued in both their opinions and work done
- An interesting and worthwhile role with the right levels of responsibility and teamwork
- Good Manager attitudes
This list is of course unlimited, as different people will all have different wants and needs and will therefore place different levels of importance on each of the above.
Research has also shown that successful companies tend to be those that integrate the above considerations to attract, retain and motivate their staff.
HR Update 152 - Cheers to Christmas
Last Modified on: 2003/12/10 4:21:17 PM
Cheers to Christmas
It’s that time of year again when employers want to reward their employees for a good year of hard work and throw a company Christmas party. The issues most employers face are combating alcohol consumption at work, combating “sickies” due to hangovers or alcohol induced over-friendliness.
Employers can be held vicariously liable for employee’s actions at a work arranged function, even if it is not on company property, and they must therefore take steps to minimise the risks of a claim against them.
Health and Safety
Employers should remind employees of the Health and Safety implications of the consumption of alcohol immediately before entering work or on the work premises. If an employer allows employees to consume alcohol at work, or to return to work after drinking remember that as an employer you still owe them a duty of care and must ensure that you behave reasonably in safeguarding employees from foreseeable health and safety risks.
Unauthorised Absence
In cases of unauthorised absences employers should investigate as far as possible the reasons for employee's absence before any assumptions are made. The employee may have had an accident or genuinely ill rather than at home with a hangover from a Christmas celebration.
It is important to act consistently and to treat all employees the same. Don't use the fact that an employee has taken an illicit 'sickie' or has had a drink at lunchtime as an excuse to dismiss him, when normally such behaviour is overlooked.
It must be remembered that drinking heavily out of office hours will not in itself constitute misconduct; however, if it impacts on the employee's ability to do his or her job, you may be able to treat it as misconduct and deal with it appropriately.
When dealing with any misconduct, the company disciplinary procedure should always be followed, to purchase one
Click here.
Sexual Harassment
It can happen that employees get more friendly than they normally would at a Christmas party, especially if alcohol is included in the mix. Employers need to take extra care to prevent any form of harassment at a Christmas party because a party organised by the employer is likely to be seen as an extension of the workplace, even if it is held off site.
If an employee makes an advance on another employee, regardless of the gender of either of these employees, it may be seen as sexual harassment. Employers need to be aware that advances by member of the same sex are now also covered by the new sexual orientation regulations that came into force earlier this month.
Prior to the party all employees should be made aware of what behaviour is acceptable and what behaviour will not be tolerated, regardless of the circumstances. It should be clearly communicated that this type of behaviour will be treated seriously and that unacceptable behaviour will be reciprocated by corrective action, up to and including dismissal.
Should it occur at a party the incident should be dealt with swiftly through the grievance procedure and should be investigated fully. Both parties should be given the opportunity to express their side of the story and once fully investigated it should be considered if the behaviour will amount to gross misconduct, or under the circumstances, a verbal or written warning.
To purchase our Disciplinary and grievance procedure
click here.
HR Update 151 - Employment Relations Review
Last Modified on: 2003/12/03 4:13:05 PM
Employment Relations Bill
This week the government introduced the Employment Relations Bill in the House of Commons. The Bill has been introduced to support increased awareness of employees at work through implementing information and consultation on decisions that affect employee’s futures and also improves trade union recognition and membership procedures, such as:
- Clarification of procedures for establishing what is an appropriate bargaining unit for compulsory union recognition;
- An amendment enforcing that employers cannot pay an enhanced rate to 'buy out' an employee's right to be bound by union agreements;
- Greater case management powers for the CAC;
- And the Bill will be amended to allow unions to expel or exclude racial activists and others whose political behaviour is incompatible with trade union membership and who hide behind their political membership to prevent expulsion.
Employment Relations Minister, Gerry Sutcliffe, said:
'I want to see an end to the climate where people only hear out of the blue about job losses from the media, or by text message. I want to see a 'no surprises' culture at work where employers and employees discuss common ground and find solutions to mutual problems.
'It's wrong that racists should be allowed to hide behind their political party membership to prevent unions from expelling them. So we will amend the Bill to allow unions to expel or exclude those whose political activities constitute offensive conduct.
'This Bill is founded on the principles of better regulation and will build on the success of the framework of employment rights and union recognition procedures of previous legislation. Since we proposed the right to recognition, employers and unions have reached more than 1,000 voluntary recognition agreements. Cases under the current law are decided in less than half the time than under the 1970s procedure, and legal challenges and inter-union disputes are rare.'
Revenue Plan To Stop Retirement Before 55
It has been reported that the Inland Revenue are planning to put a stop to people retiring before the age of 55. The Metro reported that the Revenue is planning to change the tax rules on pension schemes so that anyone who retires before the age of 55 will no longer be able to draw a pension tax-free.
The move, which is expected to be published on 10th December, would not take effect until 2005 and would apply to those retiring after April 2010.
Tupe Ruling – Enhanced Early Retirement Benefits Do Transfer
Regulation 7 of the Acquired Rights Directive normally excludes the transfer of rights under occupational pension schemes. The ruling of the European Court of Justice in Martin v South Bank University has found however that early retirement and “conditional benefits” are transferable. This decision means that potentially hundreds of thousands of employees who have transferred since 1977 are entitled to the continuation of early retirement benefits provided by previous employers and that the liability for these falls on the purchaser.
In addition it was found in the Martin case that employees cannot be required to accept less favourable terms after a TUPE transfer if the reason for the changed terms is the transfer. Employers should make sure they:
- Go back through their acquisition history to check whether they have taken on any early retirement benefits.
- Carry out proper due diligence on any enhanced early retirement benefits which pertain to the transferor’s pension scheme even where other scheme liabilities are not transferring.
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS As you may be already aware
OneClickHR.com can provide you with the best off line and online solutions in the market for all of your HR needs. In conjunction with our partner
thomsons online benefits, we can maximise the value of your spending on employee benefits and reduce administration by 66 %.
Click here for more information HR NEWS
HR Update 150 - Further Pay equality obligations on employers
Last Modified on: 2003/11/25 3:44:18 PM
Further Pay Equality Obligations on Employers
The Equal Pay Code comes into force on 1 December 2003 and has been introduced to provide practical guidance to employers on how to ensure pay is determined without sex discrimination. It is important to note that although the code is not binding, it is admissible in evidence in any proceedings, under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 or the Equal Pay Act 1970 (each as amended), before an Employment Tribunal (ET). The ET will take into account the employer’s failure in acting upon the Code’s provisions.
What this implies is that an employer cannot pay a man (or a woman) more if they are doing the same job unless there is a genuine and material reason.
The code covers all aspects of the pay package including overtime, performance related benefits, discretional benefits, access to pensions, company cars and other variable benefits.
An employee chooses their comparator, the company has no influence over this, and there can be more than one comparator.
An employee may now use the Equal Pay Questionnaire, brought in by the Employment Act 2002, to challenge if their pay is equal to their comparator or not. This is submitted to an ET and the employee may give this to their employer before, or at the same time as they submit it.
When equal pay is challenged an employer should:
- Decide whether or not they agree the employee is doing similar work
- Consider the reason for any pay difference
- If the company decides the work is not equal they should explain in what way the work is different, and finally
- Explain the reason for the pay difference.
Being challenged on equal pay has cost implications as a pay award may have to be paid to an employee but a company should also consider the costs incurred through time spent at a hearing and legal representation etc. and can also improve retention of skilled employees, attract more highly skilled employees, increase commitment and reduce absenteeism. Conducting an equal pay review in order to close such gaps before they are challenged is therefore a good preventative measure.
HR Update 149 - Do Your Drivers use Mobile Phones?
Last Modified on: 2003/11/19 3:27:30 PM
Do Your Drivers use Mobile Phones?
Do you issue your employees with company mobile phones or cars? Does that make you liable for manslaughter charges if they have accidents?
The new Regulations apply to “anyone who causes or permits any other person” to use a hand-held mobile phone while driving and this may include liability for not forbidding employees from using their phones while driving on company business.
This includes text messaging, using wap services, and any other interactive communication.
What constitutes driving?
Driving includes being stopped at a traffic light or any hold ups that can be expected to move after a short while. Hold ups where you are likely to turn your engine off and wait may constitute non-driving, but this is yet to be debated.
Employers should:
- Not ask staff members to make or receive calls when driving
- Not require employees to use mobile phones while driving
- Have a policy on the use of mobile phones while driving that informs staff of the hazards of their use while driving, provides guidance on what type of hands free to use and provides company acceptable alternatives to answering the phone while driving.
How do I know which accessories to buy in order to fully comply with the concept “hands free”?
Click here to find out by purchasing a company policy on driving and mobile phones.
Religious Discrimination and Sexual Orientation Regs around the corner
With just 2 weeks to go before the new discrimination Regulations come into force, we urge employers to ensure they are fully prepared.
Employers should ensure their recruitment team and managers are fully aware that detrimental differential treatment on the grounds of religion, belief and Sexual Orientation is unlawful; and soon we add age to this extensive list. Under the Acts liability of the employer is further defined. For example, anything done by a person in the course of his/her employment shall be treated for the purposes of these Regulations, as done by his employer as well as by him/her, whether or not it was done with the employer’s knowledge or approval. Anything done by a person, as an agent for another person, with the authority of that other person shall be treated as done by that other person as well as by him/her.
If any proceedings are brought, under these Regulations, against any person in respect of an act alleged to have been committed by an employee, the employer will have to prove that reasonable steps were taken to prevent the employee from committing the act. A person, who knowingly aids another person to commit an act made unlawful by these regulations, shall be treated as if they themselves had committed the act. Reasonable steps include having a policy on equal opportunities and communicating this to all staff and ensuring it is part of the Company culture; Training managers to identify and deal with discrimination in the workplace; Communicate and practice non discriminatory recruitment practices.
To purchase an Equal Opportunities Policy
Click here.
HR Update 148 - Are you sick of the sick note saga?
Last Modified on: 2003/11/11 3:49:46 PM
Are you sick of the sick note saga?
There has been much in the HR news recently regarding how reliable doctors’ notes really are. For example what do you do when an employee presents you with several consecutive doctors notes and you have evidence to show that they appear to be live and well?
There is research to show that there is a rising trend in sick notes being issued to employees and this has been blamed on the increasing stresses of work and home life along with the long hours people are now being required to work.
Many employees who take time off have a genuine reason, but there are many who do not. Some employers are placing the blame on the doctor issuing the sick note, but of course it is not for a Tribunal to decide the integrity of the doctor, merely the way that the employer has treated the employee.
Many employers are therefore finding that it is advantageous to look into ways of prevention rather than cure. This can involve anything from assessing processes and practices, working hours, to structure of the company.
Other companies decide to take the occupational health route. By involving occupational health at an early stage, employers are able to get an independent view of the employee’s health, which is arguably, free from bias. Employers are then able to decide what action is necessary as a next step. Occupational health advisors can help the provision of advice regarding alterations for an employee looking to return to work after a period of sickness absence through to assessing whether employees are in fact able to come back to work into their current roles.
If you would like further information regarding how OneclickHR can help you with your occupational health, contact us on: 0208 6634586 or email us at beckenham@vizualhr.co.uk.
To read more about how to manage long-term sickness absence,
click here (link to ‘Long term sickness’ article in Health & Absence in the Guide)
To read more about how to manage persistent short-term absences,
click here (link to ‘case study – Persistent Short-Term Absences in Cases Corner in the Guide)
Is CCTV footage covered under the Data Protection Act?
CCTV cameras record persons and recorded personal images are considered processing personal data. The Data Protection Act (DPA) therefore covers it.
In order to have CCTV camera’s in a work place you need to be registered with the Information Commissioner. You can do this by calling their notification line on 01625 545 740. And you need to have signs up that inform employees of the fact that they are being recorded.
There is an in-depth code of practice for CCTV cameras available from the Information Commission. A few points of relevance to this question are covered below:
- Images, which are not required for the purpose for which the equipment is being used, should not be retained for longer than is necessary. This may be a period of 7 days, for example you may be soon aware of a fight on the premises.
- Once the retention period has expired the images should be removed or deleted.
- If images are retained for evidential purposes they should be stored in a secure place with access control.
- Access to recorded images should be restricted to a manager or designated staff member
- Viewing should take place in a restricted area.
Access by data subjects This is a right, which is provided by section 7 of the l998 Act. The standards of this Code of Practice are set out below. Standards
1. All staff involved in operating the equipment must be able to recognise a request for access to recorded images by data subjects (This is a Data Protection Principle).
2. Individuals should also be fully aware of the types of images that are recorded and retained, the purposes for which those images are recorded and retained, and information about the disclosure policy in relation to those images.
3. All subject access requests should be dealt with by a manager or designated member of staff (Data controller).
4. The Data Controller should locate the images requested
5. The Data Controller should determine whether disclosure to the individual would entail disclosing images of third parties.
6. The Data Controller will need to determine whether the images of third parties are held under a duty of confidence.
For example - it may be that members of the public whose images have been recorded when they were in town centres or streets have less expectation that their images are held under a duty of confidence than individuals whose images have been recorded in more private space such as the waiting room of a doctor's surgery.
7. If third party images are not to be disclosed, the Data Controller shall arrange for the third party images to be disguised or blurred either by internal staff or using external expertise if necessary.
8. If a third party or company is hired, then the Data Controller needs to comply with the determined confidentiality rules.
9. If the Data Controller decides that a subject access request from an individual is not to be complied with, the following should be documented:
- The identity of the individual making the request
- The date of the request
- The reason for refusing to supply the images requested
- The name and signature of the Data Controller making the decision.
10. All staff should be aware of individuals' rights under this section of the Code of Practice.
HR Update 147 - Health And Safety Update : How Safe Are You?
Last Modified on: 2003/11/06 3:24:02 PM
Health And Safety Update – How Safe Are You?
Update on HSE consultation on First Aid at Work regulations
------------------------------------------------------
Following last months bulletin, it has been brought to our attention that some First Aid training providers are using money-spinning scare tactics to sell unnecessary insurance cover to newly qualified First Aiders. Please be assured that your Employers’ Liability (EL) Insurance does cover the giving of first aid to your employees and it is also a simple matter to extend the cover to non-employees, if necessary.
Update on HSE consultation on First Aid at Work regulations
------------------------------------------------------
Following last months bulletin, it has been brought to our attention that some First Aid training providers are using money-spinning scare tactics to sell unnecessary insurance cover to newly qualified First Aiders. Please be assured that your Employers’ Liability (EL) Insurance does cover the giving of first aid to your employees and it is also a simple matter to extend the cover to non-employees, if necessary.
European Court Ruling on ‘On-call’ Duty
------------------------------------------
A Community directive, concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time, seeks to secure the safety and health of workers by ensuring that they are entitled to minimum rest periods and adequate breaks. It defines the characteristic features of the concept of ‘working time’ as ‘any period during which the worker is working, at the employer's disposal and carrying out his or her activity or duties ...’.
The Court considered that a doctor who was required to keep himself available, at a hospital for the whole duration of the period of the on-call duty was subject to appreciably greater constraints than a doctor on stand-by, since he was to remain apart from his family and social environment and had less freedom to manage the time during which his professional services were not required. Under those conditions, the doctor could not be regarded as being at rest, during the periods of his on-call duty, when he was not actually carrying on any professional activity.
Accordingly, on-call duty, performed in a place determined by the employer, constitutes, in its totality, working time, even where workers are permitted to rest at their place of work, when their services are not required.
Caught and Charged
------------------------------------------
A former Partner in a valve supply Company, Nixon Industrial Valves, has received a 15 month jail sentence for a number of offences including three breaches of Section 6(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, after he failed to ensure that articles supplied for use at work were safe and for forging safety certificates.
An engineering Company, Volker Stevin Ltd., has been fined £200,000 and £4,740 costs, under Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 8(1) of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998, for failing to ensure that a lifting operation was properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out in a safe manner, after a worker being killed when he was struck by a wooden beam.
A manufacturing Company, Medway Ltd., has been fined £40,000 and £5,778 costs, under Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, for failing to ensure the safety of its employees, after a worker suffered serious leg injuries when a large steel coil fell on him when it caught on a decoiling mechanism guide plate.
HR Update 146 - 2003 Absence Rates and Management Tools
Last Modified on: 2003/10/28 4:20:14 PM
Last Reviewed on: 2004/10/04 17:38
In
2000 the mean level of working time lost for an individual employee due to sickness was 4.1per cent of their yearly working time and evidence shows that higher sickness rates occur in larger companies.
In
2001 the following percentage of employees were off sick or injured and not at work in the reference week:
- Clerical and Secretarial 3.4 per cent
- Plant & Machine operators 3.3 per cent
- Other Operatives 3.1 per cent
- Craft Related occupations 3.0 per cent
- Sales Occupation 2.9 per cent
- Personal & protective occupations 2.8 per cent
- Associate professional & technical 2.6 per cent
- Professional occupations 2.1 per cent
- Manager & admin 2.0 per cent
The following data relates to a study done by the CIPD on absence levels in July
2003.
The mean rate of sickness and injuries was 3.9per cent of working time or 9 working days per year (a slight decrease from 2002), and 15per cent of employers do not collect information on the level of sickness in their organisation.
For the following calculations the working days lost was calculated with 228 days in a working year.
| Industry |
Average working time lost per year (per cent) |
Average Days lost per employee |
Average cost per employee per year (£) |
| Food, Drink, Tobacco |
5.9 |
13.4 |
542 |
| Health |
5.0 |
11.4 |
610 |
| General Manufacturing |
4.5 |
10.3 |
563 |
| Central Government |
4.3 |
9.9 |
598 |
| Education |
4.2 |
9.7 |
608 |
| Transport & Storage |
4.2 |
9.6 |
690 |
| Electricity, gas & water |
3.6 |
8.3 |
412 |
| Telecommunications |
3.1 |
7.1 |
413 |
| Construction |
2.6 |
5.8 |
357 |
| Media & Publishing |
2.5 |
5.6 |
613 |
| Hotels |
3.9 |
8.7 |
191 |
| IT services |
2.4 |
5.5 |
710 |
| Mining |
3.2 |
7.2 |
285 |
| All Manufacturing & Production |
4.3 |
8.7 |
534 |
| Survey Average |
3.9 |
9.0 |
567 |
The level of sickness for the survey was 3.9per cent per year, a total of 9 working days per employee per year and is down from 4.4per cent last year. And the average cost of sickness £567 per employee, is up from £567 last year.
How do you calculate the cost of sickness?
The cost of sickness consists of:
- Occupational Sick pay 77.7per cent
- Statutory sick pay 70.3per cent
- Replacement labour 37per cent
- Overtime 29.6per cent
- Reduced performance 22.6per cent
- Administration 10.1per cent
- Other 6.0per cent
| Size of Organisation |
Average percent of working time lost |
Average days lost per employee per year |
| 1-99 |
2.9 |
6.5 |
| 100-249 |
3.5 |
8.0 |
| 250-749 |
4.1 |
9.2 |
| 750-999 |
4.1 |
9.4 |
| 1000-1499 |
4.9 |
11.1 |
Importance of short-term sickness by workforce size
| Size of Organisation |
Average percent of Absence accounted for by absences of: |
| Fewer than 5 days |
Five - Four weeks |
> Four weeks |
| 1-99 |
71.4 |
16.5 |
16.5 |
| 100-249 |
65.1 |
17.8 |
14.1 |
| 250-499 |
55.8 |
19.7 |
16.1 |
| 500-749 |
54.6 |
22.6 |
16.5 |
| 750-999 |
57.3 |
20.7 |
19.8 |
| 1000-1499 |
54.4 |
20.3 |
17.9 |
| Survey AverageBy Sector |
59% |
19.6% |
17.0% |
| Manufacturing |
54.2 |
20.7 |
17.7 |
| Services |
70.4 |
19.3 |
10.6 |
| Public Services |
46.2 |
22.2 |
27.1 |
From the above it can be seen that larger organisations record higher levels of sickness (4.9per cent) than smaller organisations (2.9per cent), over half (59per cent) of all absence is accounted for by absence of less than 5 days, 19.6per cent by 5 days to 4 weeks and 17per cent by longer than 4 weeks.
As the company size increases short-term absence tends to account for a lower proportion of all absence, although lower levels of sickness tend to have a high proportion of absence made up of short-term sickness. Medium – Long-term absence is a particular problem for large employers and those in the public sector.
Causes of absence – Manual Workers (Score out of 5)
| Minor Illness |
4.2 |
| Back Pain |
2.3 |
| Muscular |
1.7 |
| Stress |
1.0 |
| Recurring med conditon |
1.0 |
| Work related injuries |
0.9 |
| Home responsibilities |
0.8 |
| Mental ill health |
0.6 |
| Injuries not related to work |
0.7 |
| Other absences - not genuine ill health |
0.7 |
| Acute med condition |
0.6 |
| Drunk or Drug related |
0.1 |
Causes of absence – Non-manual Workers (score out of 5)
| Minor Illness |
4.4 |
| Stress |
1.8 |
| Back Pain |
1.1 |
| Recurring med condition |
1.2 |
| Muscular Skeletal |
0.9 |
| Home responsibilities |
1.0 |
| Mental ill health |
0.8 |
| Acute med condition |
0.8 |
| Other absences - not genuine ill health |
0.5 |
| Work related injuries |
0.2 |
| Drink or Drug related |
0.1 |
Minor illness, such as colds, flu and stomach upsets are ranked highest for both manual and non-manual workers and is significantly higher (72per cent & 77per cent respectively) than last year (43per cent & 63per cent).
It should be noted that the top five groups of the two divisions are occupied by the same illnesses just in a slightly different order, with minor illnesses (colds and flu) the highest causes of absence. Also back pain and muscular-skeletal in juries are more likely to affect manual workers, but stress and recurring medical conditions are more likely to be a cause of non-manual workers’ absence.
The Question then arises, how do you manage high levels of sickness?
Managing Sickness levels
Over 84per cent of survey participants have a written absence management policy, over 90per cent of the largest companies have one, while nearly one quarter of the smallest employers do not.
But what has caused the absence levels to drop over the last year? Three quarters of organisations surveyed have changed or revised their absence management approach in some way, these include:
- Introduced or revised monitoring procedures – 68per cent
- Introduced or revised absence management policy – 62.1per cent
- Introduced return to work interviews – 51.6per cent
- Involved Occupational Health professionals – 33.6per cent
So what are the tools employers use to manage short-term sickness absence?
More and more employers are using a variety of tools to curb absence, these include, in order from most used to least used:
- Disciplinary procedures for unacceptable absence
- Providing sickness stats and figures to line managers
- Actively involving line management in absence management
- Conducting return to work interviews
- Offering leave for family circumstances
- Training managers to manage absence more closely
- Involving occupational health advisors
- Restricting occupational sick pay
- Changes to work patterns or environment
- Health promotion
- Attendance bonuses or incentives
The survey revealed that the three most effective tools for managing short-term absence were the same across the board; with return to work interviews cited as the most effective tool by 60per cent of organisations.
Are these different to the tools employers use to manage long-term absence?
Yes, the order of use changes slightly, however, the same tools are cited again, once again in order of most used to least used:
Providing sickness stats and figures to line managers
Conducting return to work interviews
Training managers to manage absence more closely
Involving occupational health advisors
Disciplinary procedures for unacceptable absence
Restricting occupational sick pay
Changes to work patterns or environment
Rehabilitation programmes
The surveyed revealed that the involvement of occupational health physicians came out tops (54per cent) as the most effective tool for managing long-term absence.
Around 90 per cent of employers believe that it is possible to reduce absence levels with effective tools and management, but very few actually set targets or monitor their progression. Most commonly organisations set targets to reduce the amount of working time lost to around 3%. This is despite the fat that these organisations consider sickness to be a significant cost to the organisation.
It is believed by some that job insecurity is linked to absence levels.
Related articles:
Long Term Sickness Absence
Return To Work Interviews
Controlling Sickness Absence
Statutory Sick Pay (SSP)
Workplace Stress
HR Update 145 - Do You Need To Be Accompanied To Conduct Your Disciplinary/Grievance Hearings?
Last Modified on: 2003/10/21 3:03:17 PM
Last Reviewed on: 2005/02/16 15:52
Employees have the right to representation in both disciplinary and grievance hearings under the Employment Rights Act 1996. Many employers choose to restrict representation to trade union officials or fellow workers of the organisation, but there is still much confusion over what employers can or should be stating in their disciplinary and grievance procedures. Therefore, as an employer, where do you stand?
Best practice dictates that workers have the statutory right to be accompanied by fellow workers or trade union officials, or lay trade union official, with reasonable certification by their union as having the experience necessary to represent employees where they’re invited by their employer to attend certain disciplinary or grievance hearings and when they make a reasonable request. Workers may, however, have contractual rights to be accompanied by persons other than those listed above, for instance a partner, spouse or legal representative.
In the case of
Dalton v Burton’s Gold Medal Biscuits, D was instantly dismissed after long service for falsifying a colleague’s clocking-in card and claimed unfair dismissal. When the Tribunal rejected his complaint D appealed to the EAT, claiming that the whole presentation of his case was seriously prejudiced by lack of legal representation. The EAT dismissed his appeal. It was held that lack of legal representation was no ground for re-hearing the case.
This case shows that D’s choice not to be represented cannot be used as grounds for any review of the resulting decision.
In another case;
Enderby Town Football Club Ltd v Football Association, it was held that where the rules make no provision for legal representation at disciplinary hearings, the Tribunal has a discretion whether or not to allow it.
It is worth noting that even where a union is not recognised by the employer, a worker can still choose to be accompanied by a Trade Union Official if they wish. There is no obligation on a fellow worker or Trade Union official to accept a request to accompany a worker if they do not wish to do so. However, a worker who agrees to act as a companion has the right to take a reasonable amount of paid time to fulfil their responsibility. This will include not only the time off the hearing but also time to familiarise themselves with the case and to confer with the worker both before and after the hearing.
For a full guide on an employee’s right to be accompanied at disciplinary and grievance proceedings,
click here.
Are Your Employees’ Images Ruining Yours?
With all these new and existing discrimination rules and regulations around, many employers are facing the dilemma as to what they can and can’t ask of their staff in terms of appearance.
Case law has attempted to clarify some of these issues, however, in the case Smith v Safeway Plc, the employer who asked S, a Delicatessen Assistant, to cut off his ponytail when it became too long to fit under his hat. When S refused he was dismissed and subsequently claimed Sex Discrimination on the grounds that women were permitted to have long hair, but men faced restrictions as to the length it was allowed to grow. The employers argued that their policy on hair length was designed to promote a ‘conventional’ image as this was the most attractive image to customers in a competitive business.
It was held that although the prohibition of hair length only applied to male employees, it did not, when viewed in the context of the employer’s dress code as a whole, constitute less favourable treatment within the meaning of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 because the requirement for a conventional appearance was rigorously applied to the same standard in respect of both male and female employees.
It can therefore be seen that only conditions of employment, which place restrictions on men, which do not apply to women, or vice-versa, are viewed as unlawful, as discrimination is defined as being treated less favourably. Therefore if your appearance code states that no tattoos, jewellery or hair colouring are permitted, then providing this rule is applied consistently and fairly across both males and females, there should not be an issue of Sex Discrimination here, provided that neither sex is treated less favourably as a result of its enforcement.
|
