Statutory sick pay

[Westdene Seagull]

He can't stop you. If you feel ok then just restart work, but take it easy.

While the doctor can't stop you, if you've officially been signed off then your employer won't let you back without a doctor signing you back "on".

 

[Gullys Cats]

I don't think a doctor can legally prevent you from working.

That's what I though frutos but my employers have informed my otherwise, they told me the certificate protects me and themselves. I would like a 2nd opinion.

 

[Frutos]

I had a meeting with work on Friday, they will only let me go back to work when I have been signed back on and to top it off they have asked me to go back and see the same doctor.

Sorry to ask a harsh and possibly cynical question, but it occurs to me based on the post I've quoted: Are your employers engaged in any kind of staff reduction process at present?

 

[Gullys Cats]

Has the doctor officially signed you off and given you a certificate ? If not then you can return to work any time you like. My doctor told me to not work for a week at least recently but I took three days and then returned.

This is my 4th certificate and last hopefully.

 

[Gullys Cats]

Sorry to ask a harsh and possibly cynical question, but it occurs to me based on the post I've quoted: Are your employers engaged in any kind of staff reduction process at present?

Yes, the firm has just been taken over buy new people, why frutos?

 

[Frutos]

Yes, the firm has just been taken over buy new people, why frutos?

I would make sure you have absolute clarity on your employer's policy for managing long-term sickness if I were you.

By that I don't mean what they tell you but a formal, written and legally compliant policy (which they must have).

 

[Seagull over NZ]

Sorry to ask a harsh and possibly cynical question, but it occurs to me based on the post I've quoted: Are your employers engaged in any kind of staff reduction process at present?

I can see where you are going with this but I think any employer would be on very shaky ground if they used an illness to move redundancies forward. In the same sort of ilk of making a pregnant woman redundant.

I had the discussion with someone the other day about how easily doctors sign people off. He seemed to think doctors are so paranoid about being sued if they don't sign someone off and they turn out to get worse etc that they sign people off so freely. I can't see why a doctor would say don't go back to work if you are keen to go back unless he really believes that you shouldn't and somehow his objective view is better than your subjective one.

 

[Dalos]

I am confused, the website says £85 a week, works says about £120 a week, I suppose it depends on the company, and I also have my train season ticket to pay off!(£300 a month), I am up the the junction and the doctor won't let me go back to work, even though I want too.

Regarding your season ticket, take it to Southern ticket office and they will refund you for any periods not used> Then you can pay your boss off with that

 

[KJP]

We get six months I think

 

[Frutos]

I can see where you are going with this but I think any employer would be on very shaky ground if they used an illness to move redundancies forward. In the same sort of ilk of making a pregnant woman redundant.

I absolutely agree, and it may well be just the way my brain worked in connecting the two.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

That's what I though frutos but my employers have informed my otherwise, they told me the certificate protects me and themselves. I would like a 2nd opinion.

If you are still signed off then you cannot return to work as you wouldn't be covered by the firm's employee insurance. If you want to return then you have to ask your doctor to sign you as fit for work.

 

[Gullys Cats]

If you are still signed off then you cannot return to work as you wouldn't be covered by the firm's employee insurance. If you want to return then you have to ask your doctor to sign you as fit for work.

I have, she must think I'm a puddle duck.

 

[Gullys Cats]

I would make sure you have absolute clarity on your employer's policy for managing long-term sickness if I were you.

By that I don't mean what they tell you but a formal, written and legally compliant policy (which they must have).

Now you mention it, I am sure there is a section saying that if you was off for more than 60 days they can terminate my contract.

 

[Gullys Cats]

Regarding your season ticket, take it to Southern ticket office and they will refund you for any periods not used> Then you can pay your boss off with that

Thank you

 

[kingcole]

If only it was that easy kingcole, I am not screwing anyone, i have worked solid since the age of 16, so that's a bit of a harsh comment, maybe if I was as head strong as you i would be sweet , you don't my situation. That's life was one of my sayings and then one day any thing can land on your lap, I sincerely hope it doesn't happen to you.

It's quite probably the phrase or use of the term 'stress' that riles me. For me, stress is something we all have to deal with. Often money, work or offspring related. It might even be due to delays on pubic transport or a big event like a wedding. For me, the term stress does not relate to an illness.

I think I get stressed. I see others around me who get stressed, but these people go to work, and function in what to me is a normal way.

In the last few months alone, I have seen a friend's business suffer terribly, as two of his 5 staff have been signed off with stress. One of these people was even seen at the Palace match this year - hardly a good remedy for stress. I also have a friend who works for the NHS who has had more time off than I care to remember, suffering with stress, yet the same person is at the pubs, taking their kids to theme parks and going on holidays.

My experiences of 'stress' I am sure, are very different to your own. Maybe it's the term 'stress' that is wrong ? My post wasn't a pop at you directly, more a pop at the situation, albeit one, in your case I don't understand, nor should I have any right to understand you own issues.

Maybe it's time the doctors of this world used new terminology for people who have been suffering as you have been, rather than using a word that means something quite different to many?

I do stand by my initial comment, but at the same time, only you know your own situation, so hopefully what I said does not apply to you.

BTW: Just been PM'd by some geezer who thought what I said was right out of order, so looks like your support is far and wide

 

[Gullys Cats]

It's quite probably the phrase or use of the term 'stress' that riles me. For me, stress is something we all have to deal with. Often money, work or offspring related. It might even be due to delays on pubic transport or a big event like a wedding. For me, the term stress does not relate to an illness.

I think I get stressed. I see others around me who get stressed, but these people go to work, and function in what to me is a normal way.

In the last few months alone, I have seen a friend's business suffer terribly, as two of his 5 staff have been signed off with stress. One of these people was even seen at the Palace match this year - hardly a good remedy for stress. I also have a friend who works for the NHS who has had more time off than I care to remember, suffering with stress, yet the same person is at the pubs, taking their kids to theme parks and going on holidays.

My experiences of 'stress' I am sure, are very different to your own. Maybe it's the term 'stress' that is wrong ? My post wasn't a pop at you directly, more a pop at the situation, albeit one, in your case I don't understand, nor should I have any right to understand you own issues.

Maybe it's time the doctors of this world used new terminology for people who have been suffering as you have been, rather than using a word that means something quite different to many?

I do stand by my initial comment, but at the same time, only you know your own situation, so hopefully what I said does not apply to you.

BTW: Just been PM'd by some geezer who thought what I said was right out of order, so looks like your support is far and wide

It is nice to have support, (thank you who ever you are) even though your first post offended me a little bit, Some times you need people to be blunt with you, it can help you stand up, and as for people going to football etc, my doctors have told me to do the stuff you enjoy doing and what relaxes you, watching sports and spending time with my family helps, helps take my mind off of things.

I left school at 16 and two weeks later I was working and have done since, I enjoy working.

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

Computer playing up -------------------- again

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

After being self employed for nearly forty years I have only claimed SSP for six weeks.This was after suffering a fecking hernia when lifting a LARGE shower tray. After the op I couldn't get out of bed for a month as it felt that I had a Samurai sword stuck in my nether regions That was twenty years ago and I was paid £56.00 a week to get by on. At the time I had three kids(four now)/WIFE/mortgage/bills & beer to pay for--------no wonder I turned to And before anyone asks I wasn't insured cos everything I earned went on beer---------------I mean the family

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

I can see where you are going with this but I think any employer would be on very shaky ground if they used an illness to move redundancies forward. In the same sort of ilk of making a pregnant woman redundant.

I had the discussion with someone the other day about how easily doctors sign people off. He seemed to think doctors are so paranoid about being sued if they don't sign someone off and they turn out to get worse etc that they sign people off so freely. I can't see why a doctor would say don't go back to work if you are keen to go back unless he really believes that you shouldn't and somehow his objective view is better than your subjective one.

When I worked at BT it was quite common for workers who were on long term sick leave for more than 12 months (6 months full pay , next 6 months half pay then onto SSP) to be given medical retirement which was an effective way of reducing headcount.

 

[happypig]

When I worked at BT it was quite common for workers who were on long term sick leave for more than 12 months (6 months full pay , next 6 months half pay then onto SSP) to be given medical retirement which was an effective way of reducing headcount.

Not like that any more. A colleague aged 59 developed diabetes and was signed off indefinitely. The caring souls in HR wanted to dismiss him rather than pay up the last year of his pension and pay it immediately (this was a bloke who had given 40 years of his life to the company ).
It was only because his manager fought tooth and nail that he finally got medical retirement.
I know of several others who have simply been sacked