Council sick leave shock: time off double the national average - and union says stress is to blame (From Bournemouth Echo)

live-and-let-live wrote:
its easier to be sick when on full pay. if i dont work, i dont get paid, so i dont get ill.

aerolover wrote:
Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote:
Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

Jetwasher wrote:
If I worked for the council I'd take time off as well, i hear sick pay is nice little earner.

John T wrote:

Jetwasher wrote:
If I worked for the council I'd take time off as well, i hear sick pay is nice little earner.

With your grammar and punctuation skills, you would stand a better chance of getting a job down the road at Echo Towers ( or even Fawlty Towers)!

jeebuscripes wrote:
9 days is the average. There'll be some staff with huge sickness periods.

miketheplumb wrote:
Another classic from the council.
Quote "I think that’s part of it and also the fact that there’s been such a reduction in staffing levels that staff are now working under greater pressure than ever before,”
Sooo.... what's unique, tell me of any company that has not cut back over the same period, with the same effect, APART from the fact the national average is STILL LOWER THAN COUNCIL STAFF.

freedom for pokesdown wrote:
As a contractor I like working in the relaxed atmosphere of the public sector. The staff have got much more time to be friendly and are noticeably less performance-driven than the private sector. Whether that's a good or a bad thing I don't know. Perhaps things have changed since my last public sector contract but the only people I met that I would call stressed were one or two front-line social services people.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

georgina dean wrote:
THE OTHER SIDE IF THE STORY PLEASE..........just check how many staff have been released and the work loads increased and staffing halved...my grand daughter had 11 in their office....they are down to 6 now with the same work load.......so stressful and the abuse from the poublic is unbelieveable.......

....blaming the staff when they are under stress as well...........so please give both sides of a story........mind you the guy with council van near me is home more than at work.............tha

t goes unnoticed....

crispy_pants wrote:
One of the biggest issues here is that Local government, National government and NHS will seemingly never sack anyone for abusing the sickness benefit. That, along with always spending their budgets (our money) before the end of March is why they cost us so much.

Sue001 wrote:
Just reading what the echo reporters say in this paper, and the feedback from readers is enough to undermine all council worker and cause them to feel hugely undervalued, The vast majority of council employees put in 110% and are abused by the public on a daily basis. Stress is enormous, and stress attacks the immune system so wherever there is a weakness, that's where it'll strike resulting in sick leave.

georgina dean wrote:
THE OTHER SIDE IF THE STORY PLEASE..........just check how many staff have been released and the work loads increased and staffing halved...my grand daughter had 11 in their office....they are down to 6 now with the same work load.......so stressful and the abuse from the poublic is unbelieveable.......

....blaming the staff when they are under stress as well...........so please give both sides of a story........mind you the guy with council van near me is home more than at work.............tha

t goes unnoticed....

Sue001 wrote:
Just reading what the echo reporters say in this paper, and the feedback from readers is enough to undermine all council worker and cause them to feel hugely undervalued, The vast majority of council employees put in 110% and are abused by the public on a daily basis. Stress is enormous, and stress attacks the immune system so wherever there is a weakness, that's where it'll strike resulting in sick leave.

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

georgina dean wrote:
THE OTHER SIDE IF THE STORY PLEASE..........just check how many staff have been released and the work loads increased and staffing halved...my grand daughter had 11 in their office....they are down to 6 now with the same work load.......so stressful and the abuse from the poublic is unbelieveable.......

....blaming the staff when they are under stress as well...........so please give both sides of a story........mind you the guy with council van near me is home more than at work.............tha

t goes unnoticed....

David Hayes wrote:
Sadly 'stress' is the proverbial cop out. I know of many council employees who have taken advantage of the six months full pay when 'sick'. As most in the private sector don't get sick pay full stop why should we fund that luxury for the public sector.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

geoffro wrote:
stress they don't know the meaning of the word

ctrewyou wrote:

jeebuscripes wrote:
9 days is the average. There'll be some staff with huge sickness periods.

Exactly. Which means that the vast majority of staff dont take any time off sick at all.

georgina dean wrote:
THE OTHER SIDE IF THE STORY PLEASE..........just check how many staff have been released and the work loads increased and staffing halved...my grand daughter had 11 in their office....they are down to 6 now with the same work load.......so stressful and the abuse from the poublic is unbelieveable.......

....blaming the staff when they are under stress as well...........so please give both sides of a story........mind you the guy with council van near me is home more than at work.............tha

t goes unnoticed....

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

David Hayes wrote:
Sadly 'stress' is the proverbial cop out. I know of many council employees who have taken advantage of the six months full pay when 'sick'. As most in the private sector don't get sick pay full stop why should we fund that luxury for the public sector.

So wrong. As I've said; I've worked in the private sector over 20yrs and full sick pay has always been standard.
.
I think far too many here are confused with casual labour jobs. They may be fulltime and payed monthly but if you look at the employment status it'll probably be casual.

David Hayes wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

David Hayes wrote:
Sadly 'stress' is the proverbial cop out. I know of many council employees who have taken advantage of the six months full pay when 'sick'. As most in the private sector don't get sick pay full stop why should we fund that luxury for the public sector.

So wrong. As I've said; I've worked in the private sector over 20yrs and full sick pay has always been standard.
.
I think far too many here are confused with casual labour jobs. They may be fulltime and payed monthly but if you look at the employment status it'll probably be casual.

I m not confused ..I can state what I see from friends and family....the majority do NOT get sick pay!!!

I appreciate some companies offer sick pay but I work for a company that does not. I dont mind as I am not sick very often plus understand being a family firm that they could not afford to pay people when sick...

its part of life which a few public sector workers do NOT understand

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

David Hayes wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

David Hayes wrote:
Sadly 'stress' is the proverbial cop out. I know of many council employees who have taken advantage of the six months full pay when 'sick'. As most in the private sector don't get sick pay full stop why should we fund that luxury for the public sector.

So wrong. As I've said; I've worked in the private sector over 20yrs and full sick pay has always been standard.
.
I think far too many here are confused with casual labour jobs. They may be fulltime and payed monthly but if you look at the employment status it'll probably be casual.

I m not confused ..I can state what I see from friends and family....the majority do NOT get sick pay!!!

I appreciate some companies offer sick pay but I work for a company that does not. I dont mind as I am not sick very often plus understand being a family firm that they could not afford to pay people when sick...

its part of life which a few public sector workers do NOT understand

justsayithowitis wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

There are not many jobs out there and certainly not full time ones. Life is not quite as easy as you think

Dont drop litter wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

HRH, I am not sure which dream world you live in, but life's not currently like that.
I have never had paid sick leave since I started working 25years ago.
In fact, aside from 5 days off to recover from an operation I have never had a day off through illness. If you don't get paid, you go to work.
I could try 'renegotiating' with my employer but somehow I feel I may end up with me being considered 'unreliable'.
I've also applied for and had interviews for other positions. Unfortunately with so many unemployed or graduates willing to work for less, those jobs aren't that forthcoming.

dider1954 wrote:
I have a small firm with 10 employees, and all are full time.

If they are off sick they only get SSP.

David Hayes wrote:
another quality excuse for time off paid is the council 'quiet time' for some employees - housing cough cough

working from home apparently catching up on paperwork lol

David Hayes wrote:

dider1954 wrote:
I have a small firm with 10 employees, and all are full time.

If they are off sick they only get SSP.

Thats right Dider !!!

HRH of boscombe beleives they must all be on casual contracts

I work for small firm with 7 employees and we dont get paid for being sick...why because it adds another level of cost in a competitive environment...

I dont moan about not getting sick pay but it gets my goat when i see people at the town hall get six months full pay for having 'stress' or scared of spaces being paid for from my £120 month council tax!!!

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

Dont drop litter wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

HRH, I am not sure which dream world you live in, but life's not currently like that.
I have never had paid sick leave since I started working 25years ago.
In fact, aside from 5 days off to recover from an operation I have never had a day off through illness. If you don't get paid, you go to work.
I could try 'renegotiating' with my employer but somehow I feel I may end up with me being considered 'unreliable'.
I've also applied for and had interviews for other positions. Unfortunately with so many unemployed or graduates willing to work for less, those jobs aren't that forthcoming.

Look at my previous comment just above. You're really not worth the effort.

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

David Hayes wrote:
HRH.......wow you really are clueless!!! we get bonuses when the business does well hence low sickness... however like all business they need to ensure they are not lumbered with costs they cant afford i.e. six months full pay when sick which council workers are entitled to!!

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

What a stupid comment. I don't recall asking for sympathy!

Are you seriously suggesting that every person who has ever worked in both sectors, suddenly becomes lazy or unlazy depending on where their current job is?

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

What a stupid comment. I don't recall asking for sympathy!

Are you seriously suggesting that every person who has ever worked in both sectors, suddenly becomes lazy or unlazy depending on where their current job is?

So you comments weren't "oh woe is us, we have to endure so much and its so, so tough for us"?

I beg to differ.

There is no suddenly. They went, they saw, they left. The people recounting their experiences in the public sector did not become like their co-workers.

In fact TWO people I know who did temp - one at a school office and another for the Tourist Centre were both told to "slow down" as they would make the others look bad. I kid you not.

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

What a stupid comment. I don't recall asking for sympathy!

Are you seriously suggesting that every person who has ever worked in both sectors, suddenly becomes lazy or unlazy depending on where their current job is?

So you comments weren't "oh woe is us, we have to endure so much and its so, so tough for us"?

I beg to differ.

There is no suddenly. They went, they saw, they left. The people recounting their experiences in the public sector did not become like their co-workers.

In fact TWO people I know who did temp - one at a school office and another for the Tourist Centre were both told to "slow down" as they would make the others look bad. I kid you not.

No, I don't believe I did.

I have a job which has advantages and disadvantages like every other job.

Flexitime is definitely an advantage (don't think it's unique to the public sector), it allows me on occasion to arrive at 7:30 or 8 if I want to leave early, or miss the traffic and get in at 9:30 and work till 7. It also allows me to manage my time by building up a surplus at particularly busy times or a shortfall at less busy times to be reconciled at other times.

Sick pay is an advantage I suppose, but I can't see that people suddenly think to themselves "I'm gonna get paid anyway, I just won't go in today". Sorry but I just don't believe that, I'm pretty sure most people, wherever they work, have a pretty good idea whether they are fit for work or not.

Having not had a day off sick in 7 years before having a serious road accident which resulted in 2 months in hospital and over 10 months off sick, I think I can see it from both sides.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

scoooobles wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

BarrHumbug wrote:

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

aerolover wrote: Perhaps the staff get paid from day 1 if they are sick. My company only pay after the first 3 days, that cuts down on hangover days. It's always been the same with government jobs over paid and loads of sick days.

Is that even legal? If you're on a salary you get the same each month regardless. If it's casual labour, contracting or temping you may not get sick pay but benefit from a higher hourly rate. No-one's forced down either route.

Do you work in the public sector? Non payment in the first three days is common practice in the private sector and is legal, it is something that is mostly introduced in companies where they have persistent "long weekenders" It was introduced in the place I used to work at over 10yrs ago, almost overnight they were back to a full complimentary of staff on Fridays and Mondays. Perhaps its something they should introduce at your employers if "some women" are off so often?

No I've never worked in the public sector. Everywhere I've worked for the past 20 yrs in permanent employment has always paid full salary if you're sick. Some places however may not let you claim overtime if you've been sick that month. . I've done a lot of contract work too where you don't get sick or holiday pay but get paid handsomely for the work you do. Swings and roundabouts. I think the people moaning here about not getting sick pay do casual labour jobs.

I work a regular job with a salary (certainly not a handsome one though!)and I dont get sick pay. I get statutory sick pay after the first 3 days of sickness. I would also only get statutory maternity pay. Companies dont have to pay normal sick pay, it's whatever they put in your contract.

I would look for a better employer if I were you or negotiate a little better when offered a position. It's a lot easier to do in skilled roles. . I really am gobsmacked by some of the entitlements people have commented here. I've always seen it as standard that you're paid when off sick on a perm salary position in the private sector. . The handsome pay is when you temp or contract and forfeit holiday and sick pay. I would tell your employer it's one or the other Jack.

or I could keep my job which I really need.

Then I have no sympathy. So naive. You wouldn't quit then look. If you're not getting the benefits you deserve from a job start applying for others quietly. Too many people on this site moan about how hard they have it but won't bother to look for something better.

Eddie's dog wrote:
Sorry to be pedantic - but how do you all find the time for these 'in depth' discussions on the internet during your contracted / not contracted / flexitime working day?

Wintonian wrote:
One other point - I don't know if this is standard practice so perhaps someone could confirm. Here at the Town Hall, if I go off sick on a Thursday and do not return until the Tuesday, I am marked as having 5 days off sick even though I don't work on Saturdays and Sundays.

HRH of Boscombe wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
One other point - I don't know if this is standard practice so perhaps someone could confirm. Here at the Town Hall, if I go off sick on a Thursday and do not return until the Tuesday, I am marked as having 5 days off sick even though I don't work on Saturdays and Sundays.

That's crazy. Only work days should be counted.

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

Wintonian wrote:
There is an awful lot of missing information in this story, and a lot of rubbish as usual from the commenters.

For a start, we are not told if it was a bad year for colds and flu, in which case every organisation would have increased absence, or if it was an average or 'good' year for sickness across the board, in which case the councils' performance would appear questionable.

However, in any case, those of us who do work at the Town Hall can easily see how it all happens. In services where a 'job evaluation' exercise was carried out a few years ago resulting in many people's salaries being lowered sometimes by a few grand, a lot of those staff left and many posts were not refilled. This has resulted in the reamining staff reguarly working with next to no slack in the system whatsoever. That makes it difficult to manage hours (we are not supposed to carry forward more than 20 hours flexi per month but many people do, because otherwise the work doesn't get done, and of course then there's less and less time to get the hours back) and, yes, people will get stressed.

In times of very low morale which is quite tangible in the Town Hall, people will I'm sure be less worried about taking time off sick where previously they might have battled it out.

Add to that a third year of pay-freeze with ever spiralling outgoings (which I know is the same for all sectors) particularly the high cost of travelling to or parking in a town centre location, and people will be even less loyal to their employer.

I'm sure in every office or building site or wherever, there are those truly dedicated to their work and those who will do the minimum required to stay in their job, and everything in between. Drop morale sufficiently and you will see more people veer towards the latter end of that scale.

In summary, it doesn't surprise me, although nowhere in the article does it state whether this was due to some flu epidemic or whatever and in fact was felt in all walks of employment.

3rd year of pay freeze?
Lot's of colds going around?
Flexi time??

Oh you poor sausage.

I wish you lot could spend a couple of months in the real world.

I know a few people who over the years have done the reverse and temped within Local Authority/Council jobs and to a man they all say exactly the same thing; that public sector workers have no idea and are a lazy, pampered, useless bunch who are too busy working out their entitlements and dealing with office politics to actually do a decent job. They have all been gobsmacked and disgusted in equal measures.

What a stupid comment. I don't recall asking for sympathy!

Are you seriously suggesting that every person who has ever worked in both sectors, suddenly becomes lazy or unlazy depending on where their current job is?

So you comments weren't "oh woe is us, we have to endure so much and its so, so tough for us"?

I beg to differ.

There is no suddenly. They went, they saw, they left. The people recounting their experiences in the public sector did not become like their co-workers.

In fact TWO people I know who did temp - one at a school office and another for the Tourist Centre were both told to "slow down" as they would make the others look bad. I kid you not.

No, I don't believe I did.

I have a job which has advantages and disadvantages like every other job.

Flexitime is definitely an advantage (don't think it's unique to the public sector), it allows me on occasion to arrive at 7:30 or 8 if I want to leave early, or miss the traffic and get in at 9:30 and work till 7. It also allows me to manage my time by building up a surplus at particularly busy times or a shortfall at less busy times to be reconciled at other times.

Sick pay is an advantage I suppose, but I can't see that people suddenly think to themselves "I'm gonna get paid anyway, I just won't go in today". Sorry but I just don't believe that, I'm pretty sure most people, wherever they work, have a pretty good idea whether they are fit for work or not.

Having not had a day off sick in 7 years before having a serious road accident which resulted in 2 months in hospital and over 10 months off sick, I think I can see it from both sides.

Flexi time?

Most of us work way over our contracted hours and it is not even noted.

your cushioned little world means you get paid for every minute.

There are often articles about how millions do not use up their full holiday allowance because of work loads. Can't imagine a public sector employee not getting their full quota in.

afcbian-inexile wrote:
stress ?? stress ?? don't make me laugh. If most DCC employees spent a week in the private sector they wouldn't know if they were inside or out.
In the words of Jim Royale..........&quo
t;Str
ess my a***"

spooki wrote:
I was overworked where I used to work. That was in retail where we actually worked on Saturdays! We also worked on Bank holidays! AND SUNDAY'S!!! Can you believe it? We also worked after five o'clock Mondays to Saturdays. The private sector workers would soon moan if the shops, garages, pubs and restaurants worked the same hours they did. I do sympathise with those who are GENUINELY ill from anything but try doing a physically and mentally demanding retail job and see how you get on.

Kernow2008 wrote:

spooki wrote:
I was overworked where I used to work. That was in retail where we actually worked on Saturdays! We also worked on Bank holidays! AND SUNDAY'S!!! Can you believe it? We also worked after five o'clock Mondays to Saturdays. The private sector workers would soon moan if the shops, garages, pubs and restaurants worked the same hours they did. I do sympathise with those who are GENUINELY ill from anything but try doing a physically and mentally demanding retail job and see how you get on.

Great comment, you need to educate yourself on public sector hours of work.
I work in the public sector, NHS, and work rotational shifts, earlies, lates and nights, I also work 3 weekends out of four and all bank holidays, where else in the private sector are these hours worked.
If it wasn't for nurses, cleaners, porters and many others the hospitals would come to a standstill.
You should also know that there are many stressful incidents involved with working in the NHS, so don't knock it before you try it, most private sector workers wouldn't last five minutes in some public sector jobs.

Bomo JP wrote:

Kernow2008 wrote:

spooki wrote:
I was overworked where I used to work. That was in retail where we actually worked on Saturdays! We also worked on Bank holidays! AND SUNDAY'S!!! Can you believe it? We also worked after five o'clock Mondays to Saturdays. The private sector workers would soon moan if the shops, garages, pubs and restaurants worked the same hours they did. I do sympathise with those who are GENUINELY ill from anything but try doing a physically and mentally demanding retail job and see how you get on.

Great comment, you need to educate yourself on public sector hours of work.
I work in the public sector, NHS, and work rotational shifts, earlies, lates and nights, I also work 3 weekends out of four and all bank holidays, where else in the private sector are these hours worked.
If it wasn't for nurses, cleaners, porters and many others the hospitals would come to a standstill.
You should also know that there are many stressful incidents involved with working in the NHS, so don't knock it before you try it, most private sector workers wouldn't last five minutes in some public sector jobs.

I work in the private sector and have to work all those hours etc but then i get well paid for it, have a better final salary pension as well. So not complaining like some of the selfish ones on here. Keep up the good work. Some of us appreciate you!

Lord Spring wrote:
Does Maternity Leave count as sick pay ?.


Also noted that one big regular one liner poster has not tuned into this debate.

Hector2004 wrote:
I’ve worked down here for a year now and have noticed this trend myself; people do appear to be incredibly sickly down here. I can count on one hand how many sick days I’ve had in the last five years and I’m pretty sure I’ve not had one in the last couple of years; however, there are people in my department who spend probably 20% of their time sick with snifflers. It all seems a bit odd, certainly nothing I’m used to.

Lord Spring wrote:
Does Maternity Leave count as sick pay ?.


Also noted that one big regular one liner poster has not tuned into this debate.