In a message dated 31/10/2000 10:05:43 GMT Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:
<< Further to Ian Welton's point, different uses may require different kinds
of counting. Statutory Sick Pay has one way of counting days of sickness -
i.e. days of incapacity for work even if they wouldn't be working days.
However a sickness absence policy, if such a thing has to exist, ought to
count actual work days missed. If an employer were to supply days counted for
the first purpose in, say, an employment reference requested for the second,
the potential detriment suffered by the employee could be significant. A
part-time worker or job sharer may find her days of absence more than doubled
by this method. I would presume that even if this occurred out of ignorance
it would not be fair processing. >>
------------------------
I agree. In addition, employers should be wary of having too much data for
the statutory purposes. As the employer is now liable for the sickness pay,
only certain data is now required for statutory returns. Some places we know
of are still using old sickness reporting forms that ask for details of
dependants and other irrelevant data. If the extra data is required for
monitoring purposes, as part of the employee's contract this should be made
clear and where this is not the case the employee's consent might be needed.
Ian B
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|