Going to Work Sick

[Belle]

Well when my person review came up I was told I had 7 occurances against me. (I was sick with the flu once) 8 and up get you a warning

Even though I had Dr's slips to stay home they counted against me! And just how are you suppose to work when they PUT YOU IN THE HOSPITAL (my face swelled to the point I had to pry one eye open, I was getting antibotics by IV every two hours. And each day in the hospital counted as an occurance.

This is not going to be pretty when this kicks in for real.

Yes! This is what it was like at the company I mentioned in my previous post! The company didn't deny that you were actually sick, they just counted it as a mark against you. Ditto for vacation days--they acknowledge that a vacation day is a legitimate day off, but it counted as an "occurrence" against you. Woe be to the employee who got sick and had to actually use the sick days that the company provided. Really, if the company doesn't want you to take any time off, why don't they just give employees no sick time and no vacation time, rather than twisting the situation around to make it seem as if you've been misbehaving by taking sick days?

Again, in that sort of situation, I understand why people go in to work when sick. Some people have mentioned that it's a money issue--people make so much money they don't want to go elsewhere. At my company, it was in a small town with few options for non-college educated individuals who wanted an office job. The money wasn't great, but there weren't many jobs around.

Thank goodness I now work in a small office with a completely flexible boss.

[fklwmn]

However, if I took a sick day (or vacation day) it counted as a mark against me. Too many marks, and you get fired. The stupid thing was that if you used all of the sick days and vacation days that you were "allowed," you would have been fired before you got through half of them. (For example, say we had 5 sick days per year and 5 vacation days per year, but you were only allowed 6 marks before you were fired. Makes tons of sense...)

This is beyond outrageous and should be regarded as a human rights violation.

It's actually fairly common in corporate environments. The last company I worked at that did not have a policy like this was one that didn't pay you for ANY time off. no sick days, no vacation days, not even when the company closed for holidays.

But, I hope you didn't run the risk of getting *fired* for being sick. 

Not at the company that didn't pay for any time off. but at every company I have ever worked at that gave vacation/sick/holiday/general PTO pay, you run the risk of getting fired for getting sick. It's all about occurrences. Anytime you call off work is an occurrence. They don't care if you are in bed with a 104 fever or you just found something better to do for the day. Same penalty.

[supotco]

Is this legal where you all are? If an employer tried this in the UK they would be in court before they could catch their breath.

[Venus193]

That's why I raised the issue of Social Darwinism.  On a corporate scale this theoretically means:

• Only the toughest (healthiest and most productive) employees last and
  The winning corporations get to be dominant in their field

All in the name of the US being dominant in world business.  No way that America gives that up without a fight.

[Twik]

On the other hand, even the toughest employees get sick now and then (not to mention have families who may need them in emergencies). To penalize them to the point of firing for what even the employer considers legitimate absences means that the employer will eventually lose many dedicated, productive employees.

It costs a lot of money to hire new staff. And there is a limited pool of really excellent workers; if you lose one, finding a better one is not a given.

And that's not even mentioning what others have, that it's more productive to have the occasional sick employee stay home for a couple of days than to have your entire work force tottering around in various stages of illness for weeks or months. Like many, I can see serious problems if, say, another serious influenza like the '68 Hong Kong virus breaks out, even skipping the really lethal ones like bird flu or SARS.

So even the "social Darwinism" idea doesn't hold water in the long run. Like most social Darwinist ideas really. "Enlightened self-interest" would lead employers to have a more reasonable illness policy.

[wetblanket]

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but aren't there laws against unfair dismissal in most jurisdictions in developed nations?  Isn't it supposed to be illegal to fire someone for taking sick leave?

[Venus193]

Enlightened self-interest tends to not be the norm in the situations described in this thread.  I have worked for two CEOs who could legitimately be described as bullies.  they got their jollies from frightening or embarrassing employees, including their senior management.  I have also worked for workaholics who had different ideas about working when sick. 

However, in no ad agency where I have worked was sickness ever actually held against anyone in an employee review unless it was an unacknowledged mental illness that affected productivity.

As for the family thing, one workaholic boss solved that one by hiring only single people whose time theoretically could always be hijacked for the company.

[kingsrings]

Unfortunately, we live in a workaholic society where taking time off is frowned upon, even when one is sick. I am lucky that I have never worked for such a company, my places have always been very understanding when someone needs to take sick time off. But many others are not so fortunate. And sick time off is held against them, even if it's not outright stated as such in performance reviews and other judgement type stuff. Haven't you ever read about people being praised and looked up to for having worked for, let's say, 50 years and never taking a day off? This is looked at as something admirable and praiseworthy. Personally, if that's what floats their boat then fine, but no one should ever be that much of a slave to their job. Everyone needs time off once in a while, be it sick or vacation time.

[fklwmn]

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but aren't there laws against unfair dismissal in most jurisdictions in developed nations?  Isn't it supposed to be illegal to fire someone for taking sick leave?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I live in Virginia, which is an at-will employment state. The employer and the employee can both terminate employment for any reason or none at all.

But I have a feeling in most US states, even theones that are not at-will states, this would be legal b/c it is clearly stated company policy. There is a reprisal process. It begins with a verbal warning, then a written warning, before progressing to termination. It's certainly not RIGHT, but yeah... it's legal.

[Secret]

There are also a lot of bonuses for not taking time off, especially in the factories. Where I worked, if you worked a specific amount of time without taking a sick day you were given gift cards for varying amounts.  Also I know of a factory which rewards people with paid days off.  a lot of people come in sick to ensure they get these bonusues. but it also helps with absenteeism.

[Slartibartfast]

I know I get some sort of sick days for my current job, but I don't know how many, and if they are paid or unpaid.  The employee manual doesn't say (other than that I do get sick and vacation days), and I've asked in a roundabout way, only to find out the secretary (who handles all these things) doesn't really know either.

Unlike some of the posters in this thread, I stay home when I'm sick.  Period.  I may lose out on the $40 I would have made that day, but I would rather just eat ramen for the next two weeks than have to go into work when I'm not feeling well.  My job involves contact with a lot of children, who can be difficult even at the best of times, and I know that even if I'm not throwing up, a throbbing migrane will be 10x worse and will probably make me snap at the kids.  (Not to mention passing it on to them!)

Luckily, my employer is very understanding of how life works - sometimes you get sick, sometimes you're running late, and sometimes you're not able to put 100% into your job.  I think it's because this is such a small town - if someone stays home one day, well, everything can be put off until tomorrow.  Nobody is essential to the running of the town.

[avonlea29]

I totally agree that she needs to find better employment.

That said, I work pt in retail and it is Christmas. If we don't have a fever, aren't throwing up and can stand upright, we come to work. We pick up the slack for the sicky and try to do most of the running around and clean up, but we need bodies behind the register. And we all love our manager too much to leave her in the lurch if we can function. Wish I could say the same for some of the seasonal help. @@

[hobish]

I was perusing some Ann Landers archives today & came across this. I can definitely feel for the person who ended up with pneumonia bacause someone came to work sick - the same thing happended to me when i caught strep from a co-worker.

I think it is short enough not to violate copyrights, but just in case the link is: http://www.creators.com/lifestyle_show.cfm?next=2&ColumnsName=alc]http://www.creators.com/lifestyle_show.cfm?next=2&ColumnsName=alc]http://www.creators.com/lifestyle_show.cfm?next=2&ColumnsName=alc

Dear Ann Landers: I would like to respond to that "sick worker" who simply could not afford to stay home because she needed all of her paycheck.

My cousin, "Joy," worked in a large office. One of her co-workers came in with a terrible cold and flu. The co-worker said she felt lousy but she simply could NOT stay home because her pay would have been docked. Joy caught the cold, which resulted in flu and then pneumonia. One lung collapsed, and she never really recovered. In fact, she nearly died.

Many years ago, when my son was in nursery school, one mother sent her toddler to school even though she knew the child was ill. She said she couldn't miss work and wasn't able to find anyone to stay with the boy. It turned out to be polio.

Thousands of people die from the flu every year. Please urge your readers to stay home if they are ill. No paycheck is worth threatening the lives of fellow workers. I spent most of my work years in management. If employees knowingly came to work sick, I would fire them. They have no right to endanger the lives of others. -- La Mesa, Calif.

Dear Calif.: I hope your letter is taken seriously by all office workers and by the mothers of young children. Thank you for taking the time and trouble to write.

Meanwhile, dear readers, you can take a shot that will inoculate you against the flu. Don't wait for an epidemic. Get one NOW.



edited because hyperlink didn't work

[kingsrings]

At one job I had years ago, one of our employees came to work with something like bronchitis and pneumonia. She was coughing and hacking away all day long and absolutely refusing to go home because she personally considered that to be a bad mark against her, even though everyone, including the bosses, were begging her to go home. She was obsessed with being perfect to the point of contaminating everyone around her, I guess.

[Tabris]

She was coughing and hacking away all day long and absolutely refusing to go home because she personally considered that to be a bad mark against her, even though everyone, including the bosses, were begging her to go home.

That should be a firing offense, actually. If the boss told her to go home, it was her duty to go home just the same as if the boss asked her to make airline reservations or photocopy a document.