Does he have a COE, and if not, why, and has he asked for one? He can never be held responsible for anything in the working environment if he has not got or received and accepted a COE!
Probabtionary Period and Sick Pay
- Thread starter SwingsitlikeHogan
- Start date
Does he have a COE, and if not, why, and has he asked for one? He can never be held responsible for anything in the working environment if he has not got or received and accepted a COE!
Foxholer
Blackballed
While that might be good for your own work record, there's a decided argument for staying away and not infecting the rest of the workplace! In certain environments it can be in the employer's best interest to have those with heavy colds stay away for 2 or 3 days, either because of the almost certain spread (pretty inevitable anyway) or the possible danger that someone with/dosed up for a heavy cold can impose!
As a contractor (only paid if at work), I think I've taken about 10 days off for sickness in 25 years or so - most of those being the first 2 doses of Flu I acquired after I arrived, as they were 'different' strains to what i was used to, so hit me harder!
D
Deleted member 18121
Guest
Reading this I feel quite fortunate, I've always worked for companies that pay sick leave for days off, although I'm a similar story and think I have probably had less than 10 days off in 10 years.
Re the end of probation - I recently had to let someone go who didn't pass their probation. Its my feeling that your boy should have had a meeting set when he first joined for a few days after his probation period finished. Its the employer falling short for not organising this.
Re the end of probation - I recently had to let someone go who didn't pass their probation. Its my feeling that your boy should have had a meeting set when he first joined for a few days after his probation period finished. Its the employer falling short for not organising this.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Well he spoke with his HR Dept last week and they went along with him to see his manager. His manager said the probation period had been extended because he had to 'work harder'. Yup - 'work harder'. Nothing about not hitting targets or any other measure - 'work harder'.
Meanwhile he is not all full leave entitlement and no paid sick leave. Notwithstanding what his CoE might say - how can you have as a reason for extending a probation period as 'not working hard enough'? And to learn this when he is now 6months in?
Anyway he's going to look for another job. Very disheartening way for a young lad in his first employment to be treated - when he was so keen not to be an unemployment statistic and worked hard to get this first job.
BTW - I agree with an earlier post about dragging yourself into work when you have a cold. I really don't think it's a good thing to do given the risk of spreading your cold to work colleagues. You may feel you are doing your best for company and yourself - but it's not necessary. I find I don't get thanks from colleagues for being at work when full of the cold. But your companies sickness pay policy needs to recognise that - otherwise - yup - get yourself into work if you can get there.
Meanwhile he is not all full leave entitlement and no paid sick leave. Notwithstanding what his CoE might say - how can you have as a reason for extending a probation period as 'not working hard enough'? And to learn this when he is now 6months in?
Anyway he's going to look for another job. Very disheartening way for a young lad in his first employment to be treated - when he was so keen not to be an unemployment statistic and worked hard to get this first job.
BTW - I agree with an earlier post about dragging yourself into work when you have a cold. I really don't think it's a good thing to do given the risk of spreading your cold to work colleagues. You may feel you are doing your best for company and yourself - but it's not necessary. I find I don't get thanks from colleagues for being at work when full of the cold. But your companies sickness pay policy needs to recognise that - otherwise - yup - get yourself into work if you can get there.
Last edited:
Stuey01
Journeyman Pro
This company sound like a'holes looking to take advantage of young employees.
How can they extend his probation without even telling him that they have or the reason why? Disgraceful behaviour.
How can they extend his probation without even telling him that they have or the reason why? Disgraceful behaviour.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
...and he'll have passed his probationary period when he is deemed to be 'working harder' - yup - that's a good one. Rather explained why an ex-colleague of his who had similarly extended probationary period just went. I'm really surprised - the company isn't a noddy outfit - it employs 500 in the UK. But my lad now has six months experience managing customer orders - and that's got to be good.
That's very disappointing to read. Where was the ongoing feedback during his Probation, and the end of the 3 month review? How can someone work as expected if they're not told what that expectation is?
Lazy mgt backed up by a lazy HR dept.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Maybe it was coz they are a Sheffield company and keen to hold onto their money
Joking apart - it's really not good. I do get royally p****d off with him at times as he can be a bit lackadaisical about things - but even if he wasn't fully doing as much as expected of him at least tell him that as he was approaching the end of his three month period. And if he hadn't pulled his socks up by the time of his 3 month review then tell him that and explain it's why they were going to extend his prob period on these grounds. But to do none of that (not even give him a 3month review). Well...
D
Deleted member 18121
Guest
The employers targets to pass the probation period should be almost tangible achievable targets. If your son isn't meeting expectations that have to give specific examples where he has failed to meet the requirements.
You cannot (as an employer) just say that someone needs to work harder.
You cannot (as an employer) just say that someone needs to work harder.
all companies, especially larger ones as you describe will have a process that has to be adhered to for trial periods. Everything must be documented in due process or they leave themselves very vulnerable to unfair dismissal claims under constructive dismissal. Your son is being unfairly treated and for a Manager to say it's not extended due to "not working hard enough" is at best laughable and at worst breaking company and employment policy.
It now depends what your son wants to do about it?
In the first instance I highly recommend either your son or you call ACAS for advice. They are extremely helpfull and usually answer the phone very quickly and dont ask any private questions, they give proper advice based on the facts as you describe it to them, and all FOC.
You and your son will then have much better understanding of where you stand legally and professionally.
Good Luck
It now depends what your son wants to do about it?
In the first instance I highly recommend either your son or you call ACAS for advice. They are extremely helpfull and usually answer the phone very quickly and dont ask any private questions, they give proper advice based on the facts as you describe it to them, and all FOC.
You and your son will then have much better understanding of where you stand legally and professionally.
Good Luck
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Thanks @CMAC - I don't think he wants to make a big deal of it this being his first job and he'll be looking for a reference if and when he gets another job offer. But he was mightily upset losing three days pay due to sick - which as already mentioned might not actually be any different even if he had passed his prob period. Sad that his employer seems to think this is OK to act.
drdel
Tour Rookie
There is always two sides to these issues.
You know your son - if he's a lazy so-and-so perhaps the manager is right !
If he just wants guidance then he needs to approach his line manager with some gentle questions on how he can do better (he may not like it but think of the long game and be smart).
Just grovel a bit (perhaps just in the short term)because he'll either need to stay on longer or he'll want a reference to help him move on.
You and he might feel a bit better by going to war and getting self righteous but it usually regretted in the end. It may be a sad fact but they hold all the cards in today's world.
"revenge is a meal best served cold"
You know your son - if he's a lazy so-and-so perhaps the manager is right !
If he just wants guidance then he needs to approach his line manager with some gentle questions on how he can do better (he may not like it but think of the long game and be smart).
Just grovel a bit (perhaps just in the short term)because he'll either need to stay on longer or he'll want a reference to help him move on.
You and he might feel a bit better by going to war and getting self righteous but it usually regretted in the end. It may be a sad fact but they hold all the cards in today's world.
"revenge is a meal best served cold"
If the trust has gone, and I suspect it has then he has to suck it up, look for another job and don't make a fuss whilst he is doing it. That would be my advice. Always leave a job on good terms, you never know when you will come across those people again, they could be a future boss at a different company for example. He will also need them for a reference. I got screwed over by a boss a few years ago, broken promises etc. I kept my head down, worked hard, looked for a new job without breathing a word to anyone and then moved on on my terms. It was a wonderful feeling handing in my notice.
GreiginFife
Money List Winner
Bingo, well except the "almost" part. An employer can't give "needs to work harder" as a reason as it is unquantifiable and therefore unattainble. This is not inline with employment regs, as a former people manager that has had over 200 employees serve probation under, each and everytime the regs require that standards or targets be set in a clear and unambiguous manner and monitored and discussed regularly through the 3 month probation. Only provable repeated failures to adhere could allowably result in non-confirmation (effective dismissal) or provable partial failures resulting in extension. If at anytime I, or one of my team leaders, failed to fully track, document and discuss then probationary pass was the default result at 3 months +1 day.
This manager should be made an example of, none of this keep quiet stuff, thats how this kind of behaviour keeps being allowed to happen and if left unchecked will lead to others suffering the same incompetence.
Last edited:
Stuey01
Journeyman Pro
100% agree with grieginfife.
However also understand the desire not to rock the boat, first job and all. Of course this is how they get away with it.
The fact that HR are aware of it and this manager hasn't been dealt with just shows they can't be arsed either. It's an appalling way for an employer to behave and to be honest your son is most likely better off out of there in the long term.
However also understand the desire not to rock the boat, first job and all. Of course this is how they get away with it.
The fact that HR are aware of it and this manager hasn't been dealt with just shows they can't be arsed either. It's an appalling way for an employer to behave and to be honest your son is most likely better off out of there in the long term.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Thanks all - and all sounds advice that reflects my own view on how he should approach this. He isn't a lazy sod but through school, college and uni has tended to do pretty much just enough. Wouldn't surprise me if he's just doing enough - or maybe just less than enough - but if so he should have been told to buck his ideas up within the 3month prob period.
He has no protection from anything you mention under 12mths, nothing at all! The only thing that could be pressed which I've still not had a 100% answer on, is, does he have a Contract of Employment and when was that presented to him and co-signed by him? If he hasn't got one at the 13 week period then they have to extend his probationary period with a written report after a meeting so their (the Co) are protected from the 13 week ruling to supply a COE, otherwise they are exposed to that but if that was pressed by him and their not that happy with him, they'll just get shot of him without any problems coming back on them.
Until you pass 12mths your pretty well exposed to be got rid of and replaced with little or no rights, unless you fall pregnant and that then gets messy, believe me, I've been their and it nearly crippled my business!
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Hi @Fish - I'll ask him what he has signed. Also if he has a CoE. If not - then did he get a written report at the end of his first 13weeks (I'm pretty sure the answer to that is No).
I've advised him to keep this 'I'm curious and don't understand' rather than confrontational. He's not enjoying the job and is looking to move so a half decentr reference will be useful.
A COE must have the co terms of employment- a written offer can suffice if it has all the necessary information.
He has rights, regardless of length of engagement
He has rights, regardless of length of engagement
Which are pretty worthless, what ever they may be with limited service, so please enlighten me as I have experienced many situations on both sides of the fence and my knowledge of employment law is quite thorough as it has had to be over the years as an employer in today's "claim culture" & "its not (never) my fault" culture!
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1797
Whilst there are Codes of Practice, they all pretty well fall short with minimum service and no agency will get involved with minor grievousnesses however much the individual feels it isn't minor to them!
Whilst the Code is not, in itself, legally enforceable, employment tribunals will take its provisions into account when considering relevant cases.
Employees have the right not to be unfairly dismissed. In most circumstances employees will need to qualify before they can make a complaint to an employment tribunal:
at least one year's continuous service for employees in employment before 6th April 2012
two years for employees starting employment on or after 6th April 2012.
So, with above in force, its very easy for employers to be rid of people without a threat of legal challenge.
