Sally&#39;s Journal

I don't think the writer has particularly worked out what sick people are meant to do. I'm sure as a boss he'd whinge if he had to deal with someone spluttering at their desk, unable to properly do their job too.

Gah. And bah.

From:

I was once a happy little temp, working a week's contract.

Being a temp I was, of course, paid by the hour. No workee, no monee.

In the middle of that week, I came down with what was either a really bad cold or a fairly mild case of the 'flu. I needed the money, so I staggered into work.

As I left the cubicle on my last day, I noticed that the office contained only half the normal number of people, and heard someone say, 'What, they've got the 'flu as well? Someone must have been really infectious!'

So I left by the other door...

From:

quisalan.livejournal.com

*Rummages in the archives of her LJ*...

(September 2004)
"Today I am somewhat hoarse. I feel like I accidentally swallowed a belt sander when asleep, and then left it lodged in my head for safekeeping without switching it off ... It's disheartening when you're lying there in bed calculating your daily earnings at 7am, wondering if you can justify a day off work, and if you can drive without breathing. And deciding no and yes respectively, before haulling yourself into the shower.

And this, my friends, is why I want paid sick leave."

It was the main reason I really wanted to go perminant as I spent over 2 years temping as it was miserable, and yes, I always went in when sick.

Sick pay is there for a reason, and it's to stop an entire office getting infected, and to get the best out your workers. I don't think I've ever actually skivved a day off, either work or school.

From:

ginasketch.livejournal.com

Aye. i suffer from depression. My job before last involved working at the Diversity and Equality department at Kingston University and they were very understanding about it. As a result I felt safe and made the effort to commute and be on time. My LAST job was working at the business and law school. They got annoyed that as a temp i was taking time off to go to counselling and the doctor and made me redundant because i was stressed out all the time. Gee I wonder why.

From:

madwitch.livejournal.com

I hate using sick days. This is probably due to the attitudes of previous employers, as my current manager is fine with people calling in sick if they are, he'd rather we stay home and get better.

Regardless of this attitude on his part, I've saved the majority of my holiday days just in case I have problems after my eye op, and need to stay home. This is probably ridiculous of me.

From:

Oh god, yes. There's a bloke works for us; a wonderful man, devoted to his job, very good at it.

He worked through what he thought was a minor stomach bug. It turned out to be food poisoning, he ended up in Intensive Care, and his immune system reacted to it all by going mad and attacking everything it could find. He now has arthritis and is on powerful immune-depressing drugs and painkillers. Some days he can't walk.

A system that discourages sick days will end up with a lot more people with issues like that, and a lot fewer places where they can work.

Why don't people think?

From:

twicedead.livejournal.com

I work in a mid sized organisation who pay me despite the number of sick days. Last monday I couldn't speak and could barely stand, so I worked from home in the comfort of my bed (I could still type). The flexibility to do this meant that I didn't lose a day's productivity and didn't have to infest everyone else with my illness or make myself worse by travelling.

I do believe that employees need to feel a sense of responsibility towards their organisation. In a large organisation it's easy to lose this and think "a week off won't hurt". When I'm off sick I see how much it costs the organisation when I do my monthly billing. To reduce sickness overall you need to have an enlightened employer who reduces the stresses on the workers, has flexible policies to get the most out of them and employees who believe they have a duty to deliver for their pay-check.

From:

You're probably right.

I still worry a bit about a work ethos that says you felt obliged to work when you were too ill to stand. This is, however, totally your choice, and I know I've done slightly crazy things like spend a full day in work with a migraine, peering bemusedly at the objects that I couldn't quite see, until I decided that it wasn't OK to be working with delicate objects when my manual dexterity was shot.

Flexi-time and flexible working patterns are fab. They have always done wonders for my sickness record. Another thing I've noticed is that if I'm on flexi-time, I'm much more likely to drag myself into the office for a 10-3 day, knowing I can leave early if I feel worse, than if I've got a rigid 9-6 day that can't be adjusted, in which case I'll not take the risk and just call in sick.

Random question.

What do you think is more responsible, btw. Taking a day off sick, or coming in sick and not working at all, but just making sure you're seen to be there.

Because that's the other thing I've seen quite a lot in very strict 'no sick days' working cultures, and that bothers me a lot more.

From:

twicedead.livejournal.com

Can't we all just love each other?
Even Oedipus had a mother!
- The Doug Anthony All-Stars, Friends

It's all about mutual respect. A company needs to respect that you are human and can't stay well all the time. You have to respect that the company is paying you to do something and should go the extra mile to stay healthy (don't stay up all night playing Halo) and minimise the impact of your sickness when you can (work from home when you can't travel but you can still think).

Specifically for your question, I would not work at a place where it had a "no sick days" culture. I would be less productive by making myself more sick by coming in to work as a flu-zombie. However (like the last two weeks) I should drag myself in to work when I've just got a headachem, sore throat and a bit of a cough.

From:

work from home when you can't travel but you can still think

I tried to do that a couple of times when I was working at Misys.

They had a 'no working at home' policy.

So I stayed at home and did no work instead.

I am not entirely sure how this was better for them.

From:

You can see where the article writer is coming from, harsh as it seems people DO cheat the system and it's only natural that people will want to stop the cheaters from getting away with it.

However, what the article writer hasn't stop to consider is the consequences of trying to stop things. For example, we already have an issue in the UK of "must work no matter what" and a measure like this would only make it worse.

That said, who should pick up the burdern of someone who can't work? The employeer or the government?

From:

That said, who should pick up the burdern of someone who can't work? The employeer or the government?

Well, first of all it won't be 'the government' who picks up the bill for supporting those who cannot support themselves. It will be the taxpayer, so it will be everyone.

Secondly, I wasn't really talking about people who can't work, full stop.

There are a lot of people out there who can work. They just will take more sick days than most. They will have days when their bodies don't work, when their productivity is down. They will have periods in their life, maybe six months out of three years, when they can't work, but the rest of the time they can, or they will have periods when they can work, but can't travel to work, or when they need to work part time.

Right now, the government doesn't want to categorize those people as incapacitated, and won't give them incapacity benefit. Over a third of businesses already admit to not wanting to hire them. If this becomes more prevalent, then what do these people do?

Sit on the dole?

Live off the state for the 300 days a year that they can work, because no business is prepared to support them for the 60 days that they can't?

I had a good friend in Scotland who had awful awful rheumatism. It flared up very badly during the winter, but was fine throughout the summer. She couldn't get incapacity benefit because she was perfectly fine for about nine months of the year. She found it really hard to get work because her sickness record would be appalling through about three months of the year. It's people like her that I feel bad for, and was talking about in response to this article.

Should the government pay to support her?

Maybe, but it seems a bit unreasonable to tell the taxpayer that they have to pay because big business doesn't want to jeopardize their profits by offering decent occupational health and proper sick pay.

From:

To be fair, when I talk about the government paying, I am aware that it's us, the tax payers who pick up the bill.

The points you raise are valid, but I can't help but think it's an impossible situation to resolve and that your opinions on this can only come down to personal choice. After all, if you were an employeer running a large company your views will naturally be different to someone who has, or knows a person in that position.

Personally, I think more needs to be done as a society to help get the most from it's members. There are people out there who want to work, but for various reasons can't, whether it's issues with back pain, depression, children etc. For example, should it not be possible for your typical office grunt to have a VOIP phone line at home and dial into the office network to take and process orders.

I do agree with you on most of it, but I can also see how the article writer reaches their conclusions. What I don't know 100% is what the right answer is.

From:

You see, I don't think it's an impossible situation to resolve at all. This may be the dodgy socialist in me talking, but I think it's quite simple. We are a society. As a society we have a duty to support each other. And in the big picture, it's far far cheaper for all of us if we as a society support the more vulnerable.

If it was the norm to allow flexible working hours, working from home, reasonable amounts of paid sick leave (by the way, I loved the National Archives of Scotland's policy. Everyone was allowed 12 sick days per year. After that, you had an interview with your line manager whenever you came back, and they could monitor whether the sick days were reasonable. That way they kept tabs on who was taking a lot of time off sick, but paid sick leave only stopped after you'd had 90 days off sick), then you'd have a more productive work force. HR people who want to help people work, instead of castigating them for being sick would also be helpful.

The current situation just means that businesses (who are also tax payers) and individuals are paying more for people with health problems than they would otherwise be, and don't get anything out of them at all.

The economy doesn't just lose money from people taking days off sick. It loses money from people not working whilst they are in work, and much much more for them not being able to work at all, and that isn't what is addressed in that article.

From:

The reason I don't feel it's a possible to solve the conflict is because that humans, in general, aren't as altristic as that. Most of us will look for a situation that's advantageous to ourselves, whilst providing as little work as possible.

MAybe I'm far too cynical about the world.

From:

wildrogue.livejournal.com

It's not even altruism, it's an inability to see the bigger picture. If business have flexible working practices and good support systems for long term illness they have a much more productive work force than those with a very rigid system(there's a lot of research that backs that statement up). So on a large scale it is better for the business and the economy. But on a small scale manager's see empty desks and think that it means people are bad for the business without looking at the figures.

There is a solution and it isn't a difficult one, businesses just need to open their minds a bit. That's where the problem lies.

From:

Out of interest, how would you organise the day to day running?

Take the NHS as an example, it's been clearly proven that letting staff roster themselves cuts down on sick leave. However, what you frequently get is shifts with 6 nurses working and shifts with 1 nurse and a HCA. This leads to staff becoming sick more often from the really hectic days and thus take more genuine sickdays.

I'm not saying I don't agree with the idea that we need to be more flexible, nor do I agree with the article linked, but the ideal world is a long way from pratical.

From:

It's only a minority of jobs which really work like that tho.

In your average office job, most people can work perfectly well from home and most people won't desperately negatively impact on their office if they are away for a while.

What jobs specifically do you think could not be done with more generous sick leave and flexible working patterns?

From:

Maybe I worry about it not working because I know that *I* couldn't cope with flexi-time and working from home. I lack self-motivation and would struggle to cope with having to organise myself. I don't think I'm in a minority about this either.

I also know that I've struggled into work when I've been ill because I need to keep going and that if I stop, I'll curl up into a little ball for a while.

With regards to jobs that don't work well with better sick leave and working patterns are those that require a specific number of people to do the job properly. Things like the NHS definately struggle when they're short staffed and patient care suffers drastically.

As I said, I don't disagree with the sentiments you express, I'm struggling to visualise it being practical in all circumstances, though to be fair the same could be said of a system that forces you to work when you're ill either.

One point I also missed earlier, they conclude that large companies suffer from higher sickness rates because people prefer to mooch off the company. Surely though it's more accurate to say, that in a big company you're less likely to be absolutely essential, therefore you're less motivated to push yourself into the ground. In a small company where you're the only one who can do your job, you know if you don't go in, then you'll have twice as much work when you do come back.

From:

I think it's more to do with large corporations being inflexible and soulless, whereas small companies are a lot more trusting of their employees and make allowances for individual differences. I had three times the sick days at Misys that I do at Exony, and that was entirely due to stress, lack of flexibility, and lack of support.

Lack of flexibility
I lived over an hour's drive away, but working from home wasn't permitted, and neither was working slightly later hours (although, strangely, working slightly earlier hours was fine). I'm naturally an evening person; having to get up at 7am every day and do a round trip of three hours or more (because of course I hit rush hour on the M4) exhausted me and trashed my immune system. I started getting ill a lot.

Lack of support
HR noticed that I was getting ill a lot. They sent me to a doctor, who asked me if there was any reason my immune system might be trashed. When I suggested exhaustion, I was told that it was my responsibility to get enough sleep. The doctor sent a note to my HR saying that she could find no reason for me to be regularly ill. HR also took this opportunity to criticise my timekeeping, and told me that I must be in by 9am every day. At no point were my concerns listened to. My request to be permitted to work 10-6.30 occasionally was dismissed out of hand.

Stress
From this point on, it was clear that HR viewed me as a malingerer, despite all my most recent absences having doctor's notes confirming that I had tonsillitis. They gave me an 'improvement plan' that set a maximum number of sick days. They reminded me that I was nearing the threshold after which I would be receiving only statutory sick pay. Any time I sneezed or had a sore throat I panicked, knowing I had to drag myself into work however ill I was or I risked discipinary proceedings. I couldn't concentrate on my work, which suffered badly (and I got hauled over the coals for that too). I started excusing myself to the ladies' to cut myself.
So I left.

When I started work at Exony, I was commuting down the A34 every day. But they told me that I could work flexible hours and from home.

So I wandered into the office at about 9.30 and worked from home most Thursdays, and lo: despite equally late nights and an equally hectic social life and even these days working a second job, I am not ill.

From:

Maybe I worry about it not working because I know that *I* couldn't cope with flexi-time and working from home. I lack self-motivation and would struggle to cope with having to organise myself. I don't think I'm in a minority about this either.

I don't know about 'majority' or 'minority', but I know in general I'm very much the kind of person who benefits from flexi-time. I work well to deadlines, and am much happier if I can manage my own time, and work in a comfortable environment.

I've also noticed that my sickness record tends to get much worse without flexi-time. If I'm working in an environment with flexi-time, I'll have days when I get up, I've got a sore throat and I feel like crap. I'll think "it's OK - I only have to go in for a couple of hours, then I'll take a long lunch, have a short afternoon, and be home by 5 pm". If I'm in a company that doesn't have that, and I know that if I go in to work, I'm stuck there til 6 pm, no matter how much worse I feel, I'm about 75% more likely to just call in sick.

Maybe I'm unusual, but I've found that there's a definite 'zone' of sickness, where you're not quite well enough for a long commute/long day/heavy workload, but probably could potter along and do a little bit. Flexi-time lets me work when I'm in that zone, instead of pushing me into a binary choice.

From:

davywavy.livejournal.com

My thoughts on this may be summed up here: http://davywavy.livejournal.com/140175.html

From:

You're a bad bad man.

Personally I've always assumed that banking (with it's average of 3 days off sick per year) was full of plague bearers. It's why I switched to online banking. I wish to avoid the bio-hazard zones that most banks must be.

From:

davywavy.livejournal.com

Where's the problem? If people take more time off ill working for public organisations, surely it makes sense to privatise on purely health grounds!

From:

troubleinchina.livejournal.com

I get less sick at smaller offices, even working in hospitals where there's only three people in the office and we're all needed, because there's less people coughing all over me when they're sick.

I hate working temp because I, too, have had those mornings where I calculate how much I have in the bank and if I can afford to not get paid for a day or three. Frankly, on temping salary, I can't. Which means I drag myself into work sick and am miserable, and everyone yells at me because they have sick pay and think I should too. Too bad reality doesn't work that way.

From:

eladriell.livejournal.com

Rain or shine, ill or hale, go to yer damn job and work! whatever happened to pride damnit?!?!?

From: