Interesting question! Have you called our free employment law helpline?
www.cipd.org/.../

I can see arguments for and against. Expiry of the fixed term contract is a dismissal, so everything gets reset with the second. But we also know that people who've been on fixed term contracts with the same employer for four years could be eligible for a permanent contract - the flipside argument that other entitlements / absence triggers get rolled over.

I don't know what the legally correct answer is. Do let us know what you find!

It would be rather absurd that you ignore a previous absence history as they are still employed by the same employer.
A bit like ignoring the past history of some one whose been on a series of casual or shorter lengths of FTC

In reply to Hayfa:

Thanks for your reply. I haven't but I will give them a ring.
They are an ECT - 1st year ECT 12 month contract to cover maternity leave. 2nd year ECT 12 month fixed term contract to cover maternity leave. Absences due to sickness bugs going around the school, lots of teachers been off with it and a problem with blood levels causing dizziness/sickness - working with doctors to resolve. The other thing is that they always try to come to work but we end having to send home because clearly not well, they are happy to push through and keep working but we are trying to protect well being and then because sickness cant return for 48 hours even though would be good to return after 24 which makes absences look worse? feels like a real catch 22. Any advice you can give is appreciated as this is genuine and progressing to trigger point 2 (point 1 reached on first contract) seems unfair on the individual? they are great in all other aspects - kids, parents, quality of teaching, commitment etc.

In reply to Hayfa:

Expiry of the fixed term contract is a dismissal

No, it isn't. Expiry of an FTC is not grounds for a dismissal. At the end of an FTC a person is dismissed either on grounds of redundancy (because the work is no longer needed) or SOSR (because the person whose job they were back-filling has returned to work). We rarely have to address this explicitly, because most FTCs are for less than two years for this very reason, and putting "end of FTC" on a reference is sufficient for most purposes. But it's not legally the reason for dismissal.

If someone moves from one FTC to another, *they have not been dismissed*. Their employment continues. It is, in fact, continuous employment. If two back-to-back FTCs take an employee over two years' continuous employment you will have to treat them more carefully at the end of the new FTC, to ensure they are fairly dismissed. And if you have multiple back-to-back FTCs and they end up employed for more than four years, they become automatically entitled to permanent employment (although what that means in practice is often quite hard to unravel).

So, back to Col's question (welcome to the community, Col!), the answer is "yes, of course you carry over their sickness absence record, just as you would carry over their holiday entitlement, their discipline record, any training agreements, their digital access permissions and ever other feature of their continuous employment".

Thanks Robey and David, good to know you both agree absence triggers should rollover in this case.

Robey re expiry of fixed-term contracts this law firm says it "should be treated as any other dismissal".
wslaw.co.uk/.../

Which was why I can see Col's line of thinking that maybe everything should start fresh again - it's a new contract, not an extension is my understanding. But I could also see the argument that it's still the same employer so things like length of service should rollover so that the employee could be considered for a permanent contract after four years.

In reply to Col:

Col, is there scope to review whether the absence policy is still fit for purpose? It sounds like there's scope to reduce time back to work from 48 to 24 hours for mild illnesses that aren't contagious. It's that time of year. Cold weather. Less sun. It doesn't take much for immune systems to get compromised.

In reply to Hayfa:

To quote your own link, Hayfa:

In view of the nature of fixed term contracts, many employers believe they can rely on the expiry of the fixed term as the primary reason for dismissal without properly identifying one of the statutory potential fair reasons for dismissal (namely: capability, conduct, redundancy, contravention of a statutory obligation or some other substantial reason). However, as with any other dismissal, employers must identify one of the potentially fair statutory reasons for dismissal, they must follow a fair process and they must act reasonably taking into account all the circumstances

It would be a total nonsense if, for example, the employee was given 3 consecutive 1 year contracts that you had start afresh each time and ignore what went on before in terms of absence, performance and so on. d If that was the case you'd have to ignore any previous disciplinary matters, such as theft, bullying, sexual harassment, idleness, incompetence or every other behaviour each time you took them on again!! (well, if you were that stupid in the first place perhaps),

What is the point of having to give them a continuous service date as the first day of their first 1 year contract???? Likewise if they were a casual employee and undertook a series of one or two month contracts of even less, then it would mean you couldn't take into account their previous attendance, performance each time.

I'd suggest the knowledge and understanding of Employment Law on here is far more valuable than some solicitor's view whose probably had little if any practical working experience other than in a solicitors office!!

Agreed - and particularly in schools, there is no break in service because the end of one contract would literally be at the end of August with the new contract starting on 1 September.

In reply to Nina Waters:

Thank you all for your responses. Just to confirm, yes, it was a new contract and not a renewal but it seems I have my answer which is appreciated.