ATTENDANCE PROCEDURE/ NOT PUNATIVE

[keithposty]

I AM TYING TO FIND A LETTER ON THE FORUM WHICH STATES THAT THE ATTENDANCE PROCEDURE IS NON PUNATIVE AND HOULD NOT BE USED FOR DISCIPLIN PURPOSE

any takers

many thanks

[andy2007]

I can't find one. But perhaps this paragraph from the attendance procedure, taken from Appendix B "Aims and objectives" could be of use:
This will be achieved by a proactive approach which also may be initiated by an individual wanting to return from long term sick absence. The approach will be supportive and caring, making full use of advisory services, management expertise and the nominated union representative for each Area, working towards regaining the individual's full potential thereby benefiting the individual and the business. The advisory services open to be consulted will include the 'in house' Employee Health Service together with the Disability Advice Centre, in addition to external specialist organisations.

Hopefully someone else will be able to find something better.

[clashcityrocker]

2 The key elements of this Agreement are as follows:
The focus of this Procedure is on Capability and not Conduct

[mal]

Check out the Downloads section ,Lord Sawyer Report 1 from 2002 ,pages 54, 55 & 56. It details there that the Attendance Procedure is meant to be corrective not punitive.RM ,CMA and CWU all signed up to this ,so you should still quote it ,although like all Agreements ,RM will have their own slant on it.There's a lot more besides this Paragraph which applies to Attendance.

The Procedure is explicitly stated to be intended to encourage the
employee to improve his or her attendance patterns “through advice
and guidance”. Although plainly the first and second stages do form
part of a process which may end in dismissal, they are intended to be
corrective rather than punitive. The “warnings” are not therefore quite
the same as disciplinary warnings. They involve no finding of
misconduct. Their purpose is to give the employee an opportunity to
improve. Even a dismissal at stage 3 is not necessarily a finding of
malingering: Royal Mail is entitled to dismiss an employee whose
health (however genuinely) is such that they cannot maintain a
satisfactory attendance record over a long period. (In many such
cases medical retirement may be available.)