Tweet
We currently have a situation and I wonder if anyone can help.
My partners sick pay allowance is 13 weeks (65 days) full pay on a rolling year basis.
He has been off (and is still signed off) for over 13 weeks. The first 20 days of this rolling year were unpaid from a previous illness. He has then had 45 days on full pay and they have now stopped paying him because they claim the 65 days are used up. Their argument is that the 20 unpaid days still count. Our argument is that his contract states 65 days PAID in a rolling year. He has not had 65 days PAID.
This is the employers response:
With regard to then the 13 weeks, as this is on a rolling basis, once this has been used you would then need to be back at work to then re-qualify for a further period of absence, Your last period of absence was longer than 13 weeks and there was a period where you were not paid for that sickness however that would still have been included in the sickness absence total even though it was unpaid.
To be honest my personal feeling is that they are over complicating a simple issue of basic counting but I don't know this! He has of course been back to work during the year - he has not been off for the entire year so I am not sure what is meant by this. It seems very simple to me but I wondered if I am right or not? An I over simplifying or are they over complicating?!
Any help much appreciated. Can supply more info if needed.
My partners sick pay allowance is 13 weeks (65 days) full pay on a rolling year basis.
He has been off (and is still signed off) for over 13 weeks. The first 20 days of this rolling year were unpaid from a previous illness. He has then had 45 days on full pay and they have now stopped paying him because they claim the 65 days are used up. Their argument is that the 20 unpaid days still count. Our argument is that his contract states 65 days PAID in a rolling year. He has not had 65 days PAID.
This is the employers response:
With regard to then the 13 weeks, as this is on a rolling basis, once this has been used you would then need to be back at work to then re-qualify for a further period of absence, Your last period of absence was longer than 13 weeks and there was a period where you were not paid for that sickness however that would still have been included in the sickness absence total even though it was unpaid.
To be honest my personal feeling is that they are over complicating a simple issue of basic counting but I don't know this! He has of course been back to work during the year - he has not been off for the entire year so I am not sure what is meant by this. It seems very simple to me but I wondered if I am right or not? An I over simplifying or are they over complicating?!
Any help much appreciated. Can supply more info if needed.
