URGENT ! Attendance query

[makingsounds]

When a manager issues a Review 1 or Review 2, when should the date of the issue commence, from the last day of sickness or when the manager has the meeting and makes the decision.
A recent dismissal for an OPG who was on a Review 2, shows that the issue date of that review was some 6 weeks after the last sick absence. Could and should that Review have been back dated, if yes, the individual would have not triggered a Consideration of Dismissal but simply a lesser review.

[fishtank]

It is not clear cut, the time usually starts from the date of issue but that should be within a "reasonable" period of time from the return to work, a reasonable amount of time does not have a definition in the attendance procedure but 2 weeks is generally considered long enough for a meeting to be arranged and a decision to be made. 6 weeks is not acceptable and appeals have been won on this basis but nothing is guaranteed.

[makingsounds]

It is not clear cut, the time usually starts from the date of issue but that should be within a "reasonable" period of time from the return to work, a reasonable amount of time does not have a definition in the attendance procedure but 2 weeks is generally considered long enough for a meeting to be arranged and a decision to be made. 6 weeks is not acceptable and appeals have been won on this basis but nothing is guaranteed.

Thanks, agreed that 6 weeks is unacceptable.

[rehabron]

When a manager issues a Review 1 or Review 2, when should the date of the issue commence, from the last day of sickness or when the manager has the meeting and makes the decision.
A recent dismissal for an OPG who was on a Review 2, shows that the issue date of that review was some 6 weeks after the last sick absence. Could and should that Review have been back dated, if yes, the individual would have not triggered a Consideration of Dismissal but simply a lesser review.

On the basis of your post I trust that this OPG who was dismissed has appealed the decision and raised the point on the calculation of dates from absence date to formal review prompt date and the intervals between. I have on this site continually suggested that management using the meeting date and not the actual final absence date are STEALING days in THEIR calculations. But as previously debated on another posting some of the absences in the review 2 may be still active in their calculation having been considered and then reconsidered. This point also to be raised at the appeal stage and noted should this progress to an ET with a good chance of winning.

[makingsounds]

When a manager issues a Review 1 or Review 2, when should the date of the issue commence, from the last day of sickness or when the manager has the meeting and makes the decision.
A recent dismissal for an OPG who was on a Review 2, shows that the issue date of that review was some 6 weeks after the last sick absence. Could and should that Review have been back dated, if yes, the individual would have not triggered a Consideration of Dismissal but simply a lesser review.

On the basis of your post I trust that this OPG who was dismissed has appealed the decision and raised the point on the calculation of dates from absence date to formal review prompt date and the intervals between. I have on this site continually suggested that management using the meeting date and not the actual final absence date are STEALING days in THEIR calculations. But as previously debated on another posting some of the absences in the review 2 may be still active in their calculation having been considered and then reconsidered. This point also to be raised at the appeal stage and noted should this progress to an ET with a good chance of winning.

Appeal is tomorrow

[makingsounds]

In my experience, when it's raised at a Review meeting to back date the commencement date of the review to the absence date, some managers are fine to do it. If it's not raised, it seems managers simply commence from the date of the decision, thus STEALING days as rehabron states.