4

Diabetic employee taking sick days

Hello everyone,

I would like a bit of information from others on what you would do in this situation.

I'm not trying to discriminate on my employee at all, they are taking a lot of sick days or 'medical appointment' days as they are diabetic.

As a company, we do not mind this at all, they cannot help this and we understand it is something that needs to happen otherwise the employee may fall seriously ill, I am just curious where I stand on asking for supporting documents to these medical appointments to back up that they are going to them.

The employee in question is an apprentice and as a result of them completing their coursework, we have allowed them to work one day a week from home. During these out of office days, we have been notified that they have not been turning up to their lectures leaving me with a slight doubt that the medical appointments are actual appointments (although I am not going to let this sway my decision). Most of the medical appointments also fall the day before their work from home days and we are concerned that they are not attending anything.

As their condition is serious, we want to ensure that they are receiving the right treatment however, if they are not attending anything and instead having 2x the amount of days off compared to everyone else in the office, we do not want this to cause friction between any of the other employees.

Once again, I am interested in where we stand with asking the employee for a supporting medical appointment document. This is something I have not had to deal with before and I do not want to make the wrong move here.

Any information is welcome.

Many thanks

Aaron

1133 views
  • You've got two things going on here:

    1. High sickness absence due to medical appointments.
    2. Failing to attend lectures as part of their apprenticeship.

    The second is easier to deal with. You should make it clear that attending lectures is a mandatory component of their employment. They are not a student who is paying tuition and who can therefore decide for themselves whether to take up their learning activities or not. They are an apprentice and an employee with duties and obligations to their employer, the first of which is to *learn*. If you are notified again that they have failed to attend their lectures it should be treated as a disciplinary matter.

    As for the high sickness, the problem here is that you are recording their attendance at appointments as sickness absence, which is not, imo, the best way to do it. They aren't unable to work due to illness. They are at a planned appointment. Appointments should generally be attended outside work time OR the time required to attend should be worked back flexibly OR the employee should take holiday to attend them.

    Diabetes is a well-understood condition with a clear and tested treatment procedure. Unless the employee's diagnosis has been *very* recent there's not really any reason they should need to attend regular appointments. But if it is a recent diagnosis and they are in a period of titration then it also possible that attendance under supportive conditions could be a reasonable adjustment, but you should seek Occupational Health advice on that. The OHP should be able to verify whether the appointments were genuine and appropriate and also provide some objective forecasting on whether they will need to continue and, if so, for how long.

    With professional advice, you can then take a position on whether you wish to consider being supportive towards attendance or whether a firmer position should be taken on how the time is accounted for.
  • There’s nothing to stop you from asking!
  • In reply to Robey:

    Hi Robey,

    Thank you for this. Yes we have made sure the employee now attends their lectures but we shall see if this is fully heard when they next have a session.

    As for the illness. I will get in contact with our legal help regarding the position we can take.

    I just don't want to give the employee any reason to take a grievance higher.
  • In reply to David Perry:

    Thanks for the reply David