Sacked Because of a Broken Arm, Rights for Agency Staff?

[wee_insomniac]

Someone at work, who is hired via an agency, recently injured themselves playing rugby the weekend before last, so now their arm is in a sling for a while. They came back to work last Thursday. Today, they were told that they were being given one week's notice because they could no longer do the practical lab work, even though they could still do the paper work side of the job which accounts for a significant portion of the work.

Is this a valid/legal reason for sacking someone?

If they had worked directly for the company either permanently or as a fixed term contract, they would not only stay employed but they would be entitled to sick pay if they couldn't work.

Never mind the amount of time it would take to train someone back up to the person's current level.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

I don't know if it's legal or not but would have thought HR wouldn't have taken this stance unless they thought they were on solid ground. The contractual agreement between an agency worker and a full time or fixed term contract probably varies significantly - and in the favour of the employer.

[Paul ™]

How long have they been in your place of work with the agency?

If over 12 weeks, they should be treated the same as a direct emloyee.

This might be helpful

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/employment-matters/docs/a/11-949-agency-workers-regulations-guidance.pdf

[wee_insomniac]

Definitely over 12 weeks, just coming up to a year I think...

[Rufus Gwertigan]

How long have they been in your place of work with the agency?

If over 12 weeks, they should be treated the same as a direct emloyee.

This might be helpful

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/employment-matters/docs/a/11-949-agency-workers-regulations-guidance.pdf

Edited April 4, 2012 by Rufus Gwertigan

[t8yman]

is a reasonably new employee of mine broke their arm playing rugby they would be out of work. simple as.

[Purple Monkey]

Let's hope the people doing the firing don't break their arms doing something they like, because I'm sure they'd expect the same treatment.

Right?

RIGHT?

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Suppose it depends on how long they have worked there what they would expect...

[windy_miller]

Surely if you work through an agency, the company can turn round at any point and decide that they don't need you anymore? It doesn't matter if you've broken your arm or not.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Surely if you work through an agency, the company can turn round at any point and decide that they don't need you anymore? It doesn't matter if you've broken your arm or not.

[t8yman]

Let's hope the people doing the firing don't break their arms doing something they like, because I'm sure they'd expect the same treatment.

Right?

RIGHT?

[LondonTom]

.

I dont see why employers should have to pay for an injury that has been sustained whilst engaged in a sporting activity.

[lost]

You can't go for unfair dismissal until you have been at a company for more than 12 months.

So basically they can do what they want really up until that point regarding ending your employment.

[wee_insomniac]

The facts are that they can do some of their work in their current state and it will take about a month to get someone trained to their level, if not longer, by which time it'll be healed anyway. Their arm isn't in a sling anymore so it wasn't actually broken. Also, they had been there almost 12 months, so it wasn't someone brand new, however their contract was due to finish at the end of April, although it was likely that it would have been extended...

[Purple Monkey]

goes upto 2 years tomorrow

[t8yman]

So we're supposed to sit at home at the weekends waiting to go back to work?

General fitness? If you got an interest and can play a sport its lot less tedious to do that to keep fit than going to the bloody gym after work!

[Pogues Mcgogues]

I have to disagree with you t8yman, your company surely can't be that ill managed that it doesn't account for injury to staff no matter what the nature.

If it can, and your example of the heart surgery guy seems to suggest it can, you seem to be the type of employer that cares about gaining more wealth over the people you employ.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but that seems a bit depressing from where

[t8yman]

I have to disagree with you t8yman, your company surely can't be that ill managed that it doesn't account for injury to staff no matter what the nature.

If it can, and your example of the heart surgery guy seems to suggest it can, you seem to be the type of employer that cares about gaining more wealth over the people you employ.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but that seems a bit depressing from where

[Rufus Gwertigan]

What would your policy be on a groin injury from too much sex or wife swapping?

[t8yman]

What would your policy be on a groin injury from too much sex or wife swapping?

[rachbon]

i need to find out a few things about employment law, the information online is always a bit vague when you're looking for specific information.

my work was closed on friday and monday because we always close on bank holidays and we don't work weekends.

i have been off sick since thursday and am going back this thursday.

they have a policy where if you are off sick directly before or after a bank holiday. you need to provide a doctors note or you won't get paid (they also will only pay SSP for these days, on any other days you would get company sick pay.)

my doctor refused to write the letter because he thought it was ridiculous. i did agree with him.

but he gave me a sickline for a week, even although you can self certify for your first week off.

would it be legal for my employer not to pay me because i didn't get a docotor's note? i think they will have to at least pay me SSP as this is the minimum legal requirement, but i'm wondering if they can find a way round that if their silly policy about doctors notes is in my contract.

i'm also wondering if friday and monday will be paid in full, i think they should be as i can only be off sick on days that i'm supposed to be at work, if we're closed because of a bank holiday then i should receive full pay the same as every one else. would it be legal for them to pay me nothing, or only SSP for those days?

they are sneaky bastards and if i need to fight with them to get the pay i'm due, i need to find out what's legal first.

Edited April 10, 2012 by _rachelbon

[rachbon]

since my only sick days were thursday last week and tuesday and wednesday this week, i won't get paid because the first 3 days are waiting days.

if this was any other time and not before/after a bank holiday i would have received full pay.

they won't be breaking any laws there because they don't have to pay company sick pay.

but i'm thinking they might try to treat friday and monday as sick days although they were bank holidays. if they do, then thursday, friday, monday would be the waiting days then i would only receive SSP for tuesday and wednesday of this week. either that or they'll pay me nothing.

at the very least i am due 2 days full pay though, for the bank holidays.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

I can't assist on this because I don't know the law. I think they'd have to be pretty mean though to class the Friday and Monday as work days, when they are so obviously not in this instance. If they do take this approach I suppose you could ask them to clarify from their Policies and Procedure documents where they are drawing this conclusion from ie is there specific mention of such a scenario as your current one. If there isn't, then they'll be exposed for making policy and procedure up on the spot.

[rachbon]

I think they will do whatever they think they can get away with. Out of the 5 days off, I can accept receiving no pay for 3 of them because they can be treated as waiting days, although I don't agree with them not paying me company sick pay it is still legal.

I think I should be due 2 days full pay for the bank holidays though. I might call ACAS tomorrow to see if they can help.

I work for the type of company who would probably not pay employee's what they're due, even if it's illegal because they think people won't challenge it. I'll need to find out what the law is in this situation because I don't want them taking the piss.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

To my mind you should be paid two full days and three company sick pay days. That's certainly what I would fight for if it were my company I was in dispute with. Mind you at this stage you don't actually know what it is that they propose. Good luck.