Abscence question during trial period

[Nobbylad]

Hi, quick question for those in the know. Today I returned to work after being absent yesterday due to ill health. It's is the second time I have been off during my 6 month trial period. I was told I needed a stage 1 review. My first question was, what is a stage 1 review?

How have I received notification of a stage 1 review if I never knew they existed?

Next thing was, because you were off yesterday can you work tomorrow instead? Thinking I was saving myself I said yes but yet I still have a review upcoming? So have I been forced to do overtime or is the review void?

Also, is it true that if you receive a stage 1 during your trial period that you cannot be made permanent?

Any help greatly appreciated.

[meercat]

Hi, quick question for those in the know. Today I returned to work after being absent yesterday due to ill health. It's is the second time I have been off during my 6 month trial period. I was told I needed a stage 1 review. My first question was, what is a stage 1 review?

How have I received notification of a stage 1 review if I never knew they existed?

Next thing was, because you were off yesterday can you work tomorrow instead? Thinking I was saving myself I said yes but yet I still have a review upcoming? So have I been forced to do overtime or is the review void?

Also, is it true that if you receive a stage 1 during your trial period that you cannot be made permanent?

Any help greatly appreciated.

Not sure why this has gone unanswered but I'll try-

1) You can get a Stage 1 review as it's part of the 'absence procedure' which is a common condition relevant to all attendance-based employment contracts - so you may be expected to have reasonably understood such a procedure existed when you signed your contract.

2) You should have clarified at that time if working your day off was to 'make up' for your absence or just OT. It's up to you and your manager and if he has still put you down as absent you are due a days OT so make sure you get it. (btw for him to 'drop' your absence would likely be 'against the rules' and could get him in trouble)

3) I don't think that is true. You should by law be treated the same as everyone else, trail period or not. A Stage 1 scenario is under the levels of 'expected normal attendance' other wise it would not be Stage 1 it would be Stage 3. So technically being on Stage 1 can't be cited as a reason NOT to extend your contract. However obviously a manager can unofficially decide what he want's so you agreeing to work that day (as OT) would make you appear flexible and even with the S1 meeting it was a good move on your part and will I think make it more likely you are kept on.

Obviously it goes without saying if you are asked again to work your day off it would be a good idea if you could now and again atleast to get you in the 'staff we would rather keep than let go' books.

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

You should by law be treated the same as everyone else, trail period or not.

Thats not the case, you do know that during the trial period the number of days absence to trigger a stage 1 is less than that for when you have completed your trial period,

its not illegal to do things like that people can be treated differently and in most cases its perfectly legal, there are protections for certain groups of workers but just because they are in that group ie pt workers doesnt mean that they must be treated the same as every other employee in the business, just because someone is employed as a reserve part time or full time it does not mean they are all entitled a rotating day off the same as other staff, part time workers regulations would come into play if pt reserves were being treated differently to ft reserves, but would not come into play if pt reserves were being treated the same as ft reserves but differently to normal duty holders

[Nobbylad]

Thanks for the help guys.

[meercat]

You should by law be treated the same as everyone else, trail period or not.

Thats not the case, you do know that during the trial period the number of days absence to trigger a stage 1 is less than that for when you have completed your trial period,

its not illegal to do things like that people can be treated differently

So because RM do as standard it that means it's legal?! Is that the basis of your argument?!
No one mentioned rotating days off here except you so it looks like you are continuing your argument over from the other thread?



Anyway, the PTW Regs 2000 state that:

'Less favourable treatment of a part-time worker will be justified on objective grounds if it can be shown it is necessary and appropriate to achieve a legitimate business objective.'

I would seriously question HOW having fewer days absence to a Stage warning for a trial period contract is necessary for a business objective.

The Regs also say:

''5. Part-time workers have the same entitlements to pensions, perks and sick pay on a pro rata basis as full-timers. This will include the same entitlement to bonuses, shift allowances etc.''

The rotating long-weekend is arguably a perk. It's not to help the business but to help the employee. So all staff are entitled to this perk.

And the Regs also say any employee has

''6. Entitlement to written reasons for any treatment they consider less favourable under the Regulations. The employer must respond to a request by an employee for a written statement within 21 days.''


I would encourage the poster to seek this written reason regarding Stage 1 warnings and absence days if what you said is the case.

Source: http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal- ... -2000.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Anyway, the PTW Regs 2000 state that:

'Less favourable treatment of a part-time worker will be justified on objective grounds if it can be shown it is necessary and appropriate to achieve a legitimate business objective.'

I would seriously question HOW having fewer days absence to a Stage warning for a trial period contract is necessary for a business objective.

One reason is "Because it can help show a new starters commitment to the job", so a lower number of days to trigger a review is in RMs view appropriate.

Also the point is moot as the lower number of days for reviews as it only applies for the first year, and now you can't claim unfair dismissal for the first 2 years unless its included for reasons such as pregnancy or maternity leave, trades union membership, whistleblowing, reporting health and safety risks or assertion of statutory rights.

On the not being made permanent whilst under review, although essentially correct the terminology is incorrect. it states in the attendance procedure (which has been checked for legal matters)

The Regs also say:

''5. Part-time workers have the same entitlements to pensions, perks and sick pay on a pro rata basis as full-timers. This will include the same entitlement to bonuses, shift allowances etc.''

The rotating long-weekend is arguably a perk. It's not to help the business but to help the employee. So all staff are entitled to this perk.

That would only work if its only part time reserves being denied them, and FTimers reserves being granted them. If neither get them then all the reserves are being treated fairly in the view of the law.

Should all reserves get Saturdays the same as duty holders, yes the agreements state that, but they don't mention long weekends. I guess no one has tested the agreement yet, any volunteers

And the Regs also say any employee has

''6. Entitlement to written reasons for any treatment they consider less favourable under the Regulations. The employer must respond to a request by an employee for a written statement within 21 days.''


I would encourage the poster to seek this written reason regarding Stage 1 warnings and absence days if what you said is the case.

Source: http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal- ... -2000.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That is good advice for anyone.