Attendance review 1 issue

[glynnlondon]

Hi just trying to clear something up , if issued with an attendance review 1 (old stage 1) and you keep within the required standards re sick. Does this then expire after 6 months or does it roll on for a calendar year.
Been getting various conflicting answers regarding this.

[chickenwittle]

6 months

[glynnlondon]

Thanks for the info.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

But the absences that caused the review are still extant till a year has passed for each one.

So although it's not exactly natural justice, a manager could trigger 2 reviews where at least 1 absence is used in both. Hopefully in this rare scenario a rep would fight it.

[shepherdess]

But the absences that caused the review are still extant till a year has passed for each one.

So although it's not exactly natural justice, a manager could trigger 2 reviews where at least 1 absence is used in both. Hopefully in this rare scenario a rep would fight it.

very confusing is it 6 months or a year ?

[crazyshrew]

But the absences that caused the review are still extant till a year has passed for each one.

So although it's not exactly natural justice, a manager could trigger 2 reviews where at least 1 absence is used in both. Hopefully in this rare scenario a rep would fight it.

very confusing is it 6 months or a year ?

Any absence is "live" for 12 months for the purpose of accumulation towards attendance reviews.
If a stage 1 warning is issued it is "active" for 6 months, assuming attendance is satisfactory in that time the stage warning is removed but some absences will likely still be "live" and could be used to trigger another Stage 1 if attendance drops again within the following 6 months.

Example:
An employee had a 4-day absence in January, a two-day absence in August, and ten days off at the end of November. They will have had 16 days total in a 12 month period and in all likelihood be issued a stage 1 warning when the DOM gets round to doing an attendance review a couple of weeks after they RTW, let's say Dec 15th

The stage 1 is active for 6 months so will expire on June 15th, (assuming excellent attendance in the interim)
However
At the expiry date the January absence will be over 12 months old so is no longer "live"
But, the August and November absences are less than 12 months old so could be used again for the purpose of issuing a stage warning until 12 months has elapsed on each of them.
Just 2 more days off before August could trigger another stage 1.

[FinishOnTime]

The attendance reviews last for 6 months, but the absences are counted for 12 months. This leads to situation as TBT describes, where the same absence can be counted at different attendance reviews. . Managers think that is reasonable, and it isn't specifically referred to in the Attendance Agreement. Whether it's ever been tested at a Consideration of Dismissal or Employment Tribunal I don't know, and something I'd like to know the answer to if I'm honest.

[rehabron]

But the absences that caused the review are still extant till a year has passed for each one.

So although it's not exactly natural justice, a manager could trigger 2 reviews where at least 1 absence is used in both. Hopefully in this rare scenario a rep would fight it.

This being the case TBT although not clearly mentioned in the New Attendance Procedure where is the benefit to the employee from the previous attendance procedure. My impression in the introduction of the New Attendance Procedure apart from stopping managers from calling at employees homes which is still by postings on this site not happening but was to give employees an improved opportunity to clear their absenteeism history if they could better the RM attendance standards at each 6 month intervals. Annex 1 shows 4 absences or 14 days to trigger a Stage 1 review prompt in a 12 month period. An attendance review2 prompt for 2 absences or 10 days in the next 6 months following an attendance review 1 formal notification and consideration of dismissal prompt for 2 absences or 10 days in the next 6 months following an attendance review 2 formal notification. There is no mention in the attendance procedure that each absence has a life span of 12 months and that managers can reintroduce previous absences that have not been exhausted. The only possible hint in the procedure is the inclusion that ALL absences will be considered up to the time of the meeting. On receiving your notification of the decision from an attendance review meeting this notification states that from this date should you incur further absences which exceeds the attendance standards further action may be taken which may lead to your dismissal under the Formal Attendance Process and gives the required standards as previously mentioned.
In this notification once again there is no reference that previous absences that have already been considered in a formal review can be reviewed for the second time if any of the absences have not gone the 12 month period. As you have stated TBT should an employee be dismissed using this system for calculating absences and it went to an ET the chairman would end up rummaging through all the attendance procedure paperwork looking to find a clear and precise recording that previous absences considered and be reconsidered.

[rehabron]

Apologies TBT you did not mention an ET as my posting stated but the introduction of a rep to fight it.

[rubberbond]

This is so complicated, that it is of little wonder that many people who end up at stage 3 , then get dismissed ,win their job back on appeal,firstly I suspect its because managers are so poorly trained in the procedure,they get it wrong, before it gets to stage 3 ,therefore it automatically fails,or secondly ,as has been pointed out ,it's against the rules of natural justice and in the consideration of the stage 3 hearing manager, Royal Mail would be likely to lose any subsequent employment tribunal.