fit to work but sent home

[keithposty]

AGAIN I DISAGREE

One thing is clear from the case law: once an employer has
made all the possible reasonable adjustments, if they have not
succeeded in enabling the absent worker to resume working,
there is nothing legally to prevent dismissal being justifiable.

THAT IS THE ONLY CIRCUMSTANCE I CAN THINK OF ALLOWING THE ATTENDANCE PROCEDURE TO BE USED

[keithposty]

Absences which are disability-related may be counted where it is justifiable to do so
i would like to know under what circumstance they are able to do that

Say a member has a condition that makes them more susceptible to flu-like illnesses.
ATOS will give RM a rough ball-park figure of how many of these flu-like illnesses it would be reasonable to expect someone with this condition to pick up in a 12 month period.
That is considered a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act.
Move outside this reasonable adjustment and RM could argue it was a justifiable stage.
You would do well to listen to Numpty...she knows what she is talking about.

MAY I ASK HOW FLUE LIKE ILLNESS WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE ACT TO GAIN REASONABLE ADJUSTMANTS STATUS

UNLESS THERE IS AN UNDERLYING CONDITION SUCH AS HIV, I DO NOT SEE HOW THIS IS RELEVANT

[fishtank]

MAY I ASK HOW FLUE LIKE ILLNESS WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE ACT TO GAIN REASONABLE ADJUSTMANTS STATUS

UNLESS THERE IS AN UNDERLYING CONDITION SUCH AS HIV, I DO NOT SEE HOW THIS IS RELEVANT

There are many conditions and subsequent treatments covered by the Equality Act that lower the immune system.
Steroids lower the immune system and are used to treat many conditions..
Flu-like illnesses was just an example...it could be any complication relating to their condition.

Don't put too much faith in case law Keith,if you speak to a lawyer you will find that for every case you find to back up your point the other side will find one that undermines it.
That's the game that lawyers play...it's called case law top trumps.

[keithposty]

Ii understand what you are saying and being a rep, i never take anything personal

what i can tell you is i have had to put up with this crap for the past 18 months due to my disability

i have been to an ATOS assessment center (i could not refuse)
THEY HAVE PUT MONEY UNDER MY NOSE IHR
been to meetings with dsm
been in meetings with HR

I HAVE THROWN EVERYTHING I KNOW AT THEM, THANK YOU CWU FOR THAT AND

I AM STILL IN MY JOB WITH REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS

i must be doing some thing right

[stupidboy]

my condition is arthritis mainly in my lower back. my last atos report stated amended outdoor duties, gp's fit notes stated the same. this worked fine for many months. my dom then decides to take me off my duty and make me work inside,not great when you have an arthritic back as the lack of mobility required indoors stiffens the muscles resulting in more pain. told my dom this,the result a letter telling me i have to go home sick. i have atos report and gp's fit to work note so why is my dom more medically qualified than them. theres walks in my office regularly done on o/t, loads of packets to deliver, so theres work there i can be doing. none of this is my choice,i'm being made to be off work so how is it fair that this goes on my sick record.
my condition is considered a disability under the equalities act.

[NumptyBumpty]

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT NUMPTYBUMPTY

unless you have done the disability champions course, please refrain from posting inacurate advice, so to answer your question

No need to be rude. You don't know anything about me or my knowledge on the topic. I stand by what I said.

Do you seriously think that having a disability gives you a license to have as much absence as you like? If you know anything about the topic then you will know it is a very grey area. Citing one successful tribunal doesn't mean that we cannot be dismissed for disability related absences. Each disability is different and each case is different. In some cases the disability would not have a detrimental affect on their attendance, in some it does.

There are many reasonable adjustments that an employer might be expected to make. One reasonable adjustment might be to the expected attendance level and they may agree what an acceptable level of absence would be before triggering warnings. It might be that this level of adjustment might not be sufficient. It will never be known what level would be sufficient until it is tested at a tribunal. Who wants to take that risk?

You need to also consider that in some cases RM might be prepared to take a gamble and dismiss someone knowing that they may lose a tribunal (or being completely ignorant of the fact), if they really want to get rid of someone. They might rely on the employee being scared of losing the case and not proceeding to tribunal or accepting a low payout before completion.

You might have the confidence to fight your case but there are a lot of people out there who haven't.

[NumptyBumpty]

They wouldn't dismiss anyone for disability related absences but if the absences became excessive you can bet your bottom dollar they would look at IHR.

Totally disagree. RM do dismiss people for disability related absences. Not everyone with an excessive absence record qualifies for IHR.

[music4essex]

I have a disability under DDA arthritic back due to AOD 3yrs ago

I have never had any time off due to it, but unfortunatly cannot complete a walking delivery in RM times and for this I have had 5 atos meeting culminating in my dom trying to IHR, I have had meetings with adm agreements made for a smaller delivery but RM rengagading on it,

But I do know that I will go all the way against RM as I have no choice.

Tomorrow I have another meeting to try and thrash something out, this has been going on almost a year

last week I was off sick with Chest infection came back to work today told them it was work related stress in which caused my immune system to be low to get the infection made sure they wrote it down.

Essex mum

[keithposty]

NUMPTYBUMPTY

please accept my apologies for my post. i can assure you it is very rare that i get annoyed but i am getting rather fed up of all the sniping and browbeating of the cwu

the cwu has been good to me and i help members and non members alike

i go by personal experience and by what i have been taught in college, and i have the diploma to prove it.

difference and diversity is what makes forums like this a great source of knowledge but a minority spoil it for the rest

please accept my apologies and i ask the site team to remove my post

[fishtank]

i can assure you it is very rare that i get annoyed but i am getting rather fed up of all the sniping and browbeating of the cwu

I don't understand that Keith.
No-one has mentioned the CWU in this thread.

On the more general issue what you get on this site is opinions....you take them as you get them...and hopefully learn a little from them....some more than others.
Being annoyed or fed up at criticism of the CWU is in my opinion the wrong reaction..we should be interested and worried by the reaction of a lot of members to the CWU.
We should be looking for solutions not becoming angry that the problems are being highlighted.

[General Mannerheim]

Ted Stead article is interesting.
http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... rint_A.pdf