# sick leave assigned by employer



## Izolda (9 Jan 2020)

HI All, due to serious health issues i have been off sick for the past 6 months, i have now been certified fit to return to work by my doctor with some provisions i.e initial part time or phased base employment and the need to be assessed by an organisational health therapist. 
The company has now extended my sick leave despite my fit to return to work until my meeting with the organisational therapist. Can a company actually mark you as sick despite been signed of by your doc? Cheers Izolda


----------



## Leo (10 Jan 2020)

Izolda said:


> Can a company actually mark you as sick despite been signed of by your doc?



But your doc didn't sign you off as being fully able to return to the role you held. Your employer can't be forced to take you back on a part-time basis if that causes them undue difficulty or expense, and your doctor's reference to an assessment by an organisational health therapist means your employer would be foolish to take you back before they can arrange that for the first day back. 

Your employer's insurers are likely involved here, and they will be looking to protect themselves from future claims by satisfying themselves that your are indeed fit to return to work, and that your return isn't likely to pose any risks to your recovery / rehabilitation.


----------



## Sunny (10 Jan 2020)

100%, the company is in the right here. You should be grateful you have an employer who wants to make sure everyone's interest including your own are protected.


----------



## Clamball (11 Jan 2020)

Yes, as a manager I would not be happy if that was what your doctor certified.  

I would like further guidance from the company doctor as to when in their opinion you would be fit to resume your duties 100%.   Then if that was feasible I would be considering if it was best for the company that you wait until date of 100 % fit, or risk the part time return approach.  The problem with a part time return is that it may never morph into full time.  Or something that initially was planned to be a 5 week transition changes into a 5 month transition.  As a manager I would be thinking it may be better for the company to employ a temporary person full time for 5 months rather than have a sick staff member return on a part time basis.

And if there were can return to work but is no longer able to do x as part of their normal duties, I as a manager would be very concerned. If you can only do 90 % of the job for an undetermined amount of time, who is going to do the other 10% and when will you do 100%. Should I as a manager ask you every day/ week/ month. And I don’t want to get into any discussion on your illness, frankly it is none of my business, and it would feel like prying but I would still need to know date of 100% fitness so I could manage business needs.

And if you had a permanent disability I would like the company doctor to give guidance on legal accommodations the company would need to make.  The Occ Health or Company Doctor might say person is 100 % fit to carry out all duties but you need to move desks around to make space for a wheel chair and install a ramp.  Or you are 100 % but need an office because noise is unbearable etc etc.

Best of luck and I hope your health continues to improve.


----------



## hunter1 (11 Jan 2020)

Izolda said:


> HI All, due to serious health issues i have been off sick for the past 6 months, i have now been certified fit to return to work by my doctor with some provisions i.e initial part time or phased base employment and the need to be assessed by an organisational health therapist.
> The company has now extended my sick leave despite my fit to return to work until my meeting with the organisational therapist. Can a company actually mark you as sick despite been signed of by your doc? Cheers Izolda







__





						Employment, Pensions & Benefits Lawyers | Holmes | Holmes
					

Holmes provides commercial and strategic advice on all workplace issues from recruitment to retirement. We advise on general employment matters including employment terms and the employee handbook, contractor arrangements, statutory rights and obligations, unfair dismissals, equality, industrial...




					www.homs.ie
				




The link may assist your query.


----------



## Sue Ellen (11 Jan 2020)

Izolda said:


> HI All, due to serious health issues i have been off sick for the past 6 months, i have now been certified fit to return to work by my doctor with some provisions i.e initial part time or phased base employment and the need to be assessed by an organisational health therapist.
> The company has now extended my sick leave despite my fit to return to work until my meeting with the organisational therapist. Can a company actually mark you as sick despite been signed of by your doc? Cheers Izolda



I think you are more likely being referred to an


----------



## Izolda (16 Jan 2020)

Tnx all for your replies,  i am actually very glad to be returning to work and be seen by a specialist, my query was more focused on the fact that the company signed my off as certified sick ? the issue has now been resolved as i m no longer certified sick but paid absence.  tnx again guys


----------



## Purple (16 Jan 2020)

This scenario must be a nightmare for anyone running a small business.


----------



## Thirsty (17 Jan 2020)

Probably a worse nightmare for the person suffering from a long term illness.


----------



## beautfan (17 Jan 2020)

And a big business / service.


----------



## Purple (17 Jan 2020)

beautfan said:


> And a big business / service.


Big businesses have HR departments and/or people with the skills and time to deal with this sort of issue. The disruption and cost to a small business could be devastating.


----------



## Leper (17 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> Big businesses have HR departments and/or people with the skills and time to deal with this sort of issue. The disruption and cost to a small business could be devastating.



Izolda was sick for six months. Her doctor issued a recommendation that she was fit to resume duty and pesumably the ability to carry the full range of her duties. Whether the business is large or small is not the issue. The issue is the policy of the company in not accepting the word of Izolda's doctor. The potential devastating disruption and cost was brought on the company by itself, not the employee. (Just another reason why we need trade unions).


----------



## Purple (17 Jan 2020)

Leper said:


> Izolda was sick for six months. Her doctor issued a recommendation that she was fit to resume duty and pesumably the ability to carry the full range of her duties. Whether the business is large or small is not the issue. The issue is the policy of the company in not accepting the word of Izolda's doctor. The potential devastating disruption and cost was brought on the company by itself, not the employee. (Just another reason why we need trade unions).


That's a totally inaccurate presentation of the OP's post and the employers response. 

Having seen the devastation that Unions cause on businesses, and having seen the resulting unemployment, I wouldn't with them on any business or employer. They are a cancer on society and one of the main reasons people die on trolleys in our hospitals, children with special needs are not provided for and families sleep in hotels. They are the tar in the veins of our society and the State sector.


----------



## Leper (17 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> That's a totally inaccurate presentation of the OP's post and the employers response.
> 
> Having seen the devastation that Unions cause on businesses, and having seen the resulting unemployment, I wouldn't with them on any business or employer. They are a cancer on society and one of the main reasons people die on trolleys in our hospitals, children with special needs are not provided for and families sleep in hotels. They are the tar in the veins of our society and the State sector.



Purple you're at it again. (i) How can you say "That's totally inaccuurate presentation . . . " Did you read my post?
(ii)" . . . . and the employers response." Once agin,, did you read my post.
(iii) Did you read Izolda's post?

If I were representing Izolda as a local trade union buff I'd have no problem dissolving your concerns. 

. . . . and another point, the reason trade unions exist is because of the likes that represent cases like you did here. 

Point the finger where you should and not be looking for a soft scapegoat.


----------



## Purple (17 Jan 2020)

Leper said:


> Purple you're at it again. (i) How can you say "That's totally inaccurate presentation . . . " Did you read my post?
> (ii)" . . . . and the employers response." Once agin,, did you read my post.
> (iii) Did you read Izolda's post?
> 
> ...


I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. That defensiveness is a big part of the problem. I'm saying that the law is designed by public servants and people in large organisations with the assumption that everyone has access to their level of resources.
In a case like this the employer may not have the ability to facilitate the provisions set out by the doctor and so may leave themself liable if they take the OP back to work without them being 100% fit to resume 100% of their duties. Where I work (no Union) we'd do a risk assessment, consult our insurers and talk to the employee. We also pay sick leave to long term employees.


----------



## Ceist Beag (17 Jan 2020)

Leper, your post was a totally inaccurate representation of the OP. You said


> Her doctor issued a recommendation that she was fit to resume duty and pesumably the ability to carry the full range of her duties. Whether the business is large or small is not the issue. The issue is the policy of the company in not accepting the word of Izolda's doctor.


What the OP said was


> i have now been certified fit to return to work by my doctor with some provisions i.e initial part time or phased base employment and the need to be assessed by an organisational health therapist.


The important point here is that the doctor did not recommend that the OP was fit to resume duty and carry out the full range of her duties. Quite the opposite. The doctor added some previsions such as intially returning part time or phased employment and the need to be assessed.
The company clearly were not willing to accept this, as is their right. It is not that they are not accepting the word of the doctor. They simply don't want to accept the terms proposed for the OP returning to work.


----------



## Leo (17 Jan 2020)

Leper said:


> If I were representing Izolda as a local trade union buff I'd have no problem dissolving your concerns.



Based on your information provided in the OP, can you categorically state that the OP is 100% fit to resume their full duties in the exact manner they did prior to going on leave?


----------



## odyssey06 (17 Jan 2020)

OP I think it would be worth reading this, especially in relation to reasonable accommodation.








						Returning To Work From Sick Leave - Employee Benefits & Compensation - Ireland
					

We have an employee who has been on long-term sick leave and wishes to return to work on Monday.  We are concerned about their fitness to return to normal duties and wish to delay their return.




					www.mondaq.com


----------



## Leper (17 Jan 2020)

Apologies to Purple, Leo Odyssey06, CeistBeag, Isolda and anybody else who looked in - I got that 100% wrong. Also, apologies for delay in replying.


----------



## Izolda (17 Jan 2020)

Thirsty said:


> Probably a worse nightmare for the person suffering from a long term illness.





Purple said:


> This scenario must be a nightmare for anyone running a small business.


meaning..?? i have been ran over by an idiot in his car... broken bones ... not sure if u have any ideas what is a real nightmare ...


----------



## Leper (17 Jan 2020)

Hi Izolda, I can empathise with your frustration. Your employer has to cover all bases. If you were let work away regardless of your plight and for some reason you managed to injure yourself more the dreaded word litigation comes to the fore. Your doctor was covering himself/herself too in this respect. You'll probably say that you wouldn't complain whether-or-which and that is to your credit. But, in these days of rampant litigation fostered by the legal profession and anybody else who can make a few easy bob t's have to be crossed and i's dotted.

Forget any comments on the forum. When you participate here and elsewhere you will be taken to task. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, it just comes with the territory

Again, apologies and I hope you have a swift and successful recovery
Lep


----------



## Izolda (17 Jan 2020)

Leper said:


> Hi Izolda, I can empathise with your frustration. Your employer has to cover all bases. If you were let work away regardless of your plight and for some reason you managed to injure yourself more the dreaded word litigation comes to the fore. Your doctor was covering himself/herself too in this respect. You'll probably say that you wouldn't complain whether-or-which and that is to your credit. But, in these days of rampant litigation fostered by the legal profession and anybody else who can make a few easy bob t's have to be crossed and i's dotted.
> 
> Forget any comments on the forum. When you participate here and elsewhere you will be taken to task. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, it just comes with the territory
> 
> ...


Tnx a lot Leper - i guess i was naive LOL


----------



## Thirsty (17 Jan 2020)

@Izolda - I think you may be misunderstanding my coment; in response to the apparent sympathy being shown to the small business, I'm suggesting that its far worse for the individual concerned.


----------



## Clamball (18 Jan 2020)

izolda, when I spoke from the point of view of a manager I was trying to show how an employee’s illness can impact decisions taken by a manager both to ensure that the work gets done and how a manager thinks about part time return to work.  

I hope I conveyed how forum posters have sympathy for you on your illness and your on going recovery.   You say you are now on paid leave rather than sick leave.  This is not a concept I have come across before when someone is returning to work after an illness.  What does it mean for you?


----------



## Izolda (18 Jan 2020)

Thirsty said:


> @Izolda - I think you may be misunderstanding my coment; in response to the apparent sympathy being shown to the small business, I'm suggesting that its far worse for the individual concerned.


i did understand, that was my IT skills or lack of.... adding your comment to another comment reply lol


----------



## Purple (20 Jan 2020)

Izolda said:


> meaning..?? i have been ran over by an idiot in his car... broken bones ... not sure if u have any ideas what is a real nightmare ...


I'm not saying it isn't a nightmare scenario for you. I'm saying that for small businesses it is also very difficult to manage these situations correctly.


----------

