No words can express the horror of this pension system.

[Lewkowski]

In the UK anyone sick <1 week 'self-certifies' (no doctor), but there's no statutory sick pay for first three days of absence. So we often have problems with people faking sickness, but it's an issue from the view of struggling without them as at least they're not paid for it. No number of sick days, but if people are unreliable then it can be a disciplinary issue.

As a 7 day a week business I also can chart what day of a week people call in sick. Most commonly a problem on Saturday's. Showed one of the worst offenders a bar chart once, in 6 months of employment he'd been "sick" on 12 Saturdays and just 1 Monday (he was scheduled for every Sat and Mon). Said if it continued it'd be taken as a disciplinary issue, suddenly no more Saturday Night Fever.

Huge problem in the states called FMLA. Get a doctor's note for back pain or migraines and then poof you've got the Friday Monday Leave Act.

[Ominous Gamer]

Which does come out of sick time, then vacation time, then results in no pay...
also takes a fair amount of paperwork, and it is tracked (but not in the annual review sense).

I was able to take it for my dad's final days, and again for my mother's cancer surgery.

[Veldan Rath]

Actually, it's far less than STD/LTD. and yes it is tracked, but FMLA also regains time so, while yes you aint getting paid for it, some people are just fine taking less home occasionally, but not working the 40/week and being job protected.

[Lewkowski]

Which does come out of sick time, then vacation time, then results in no pay...
also takes a far amount of paperwork, and it is tracked (but not in the annual review sense).

I was able to take it for my dad's final days, and again for my mother's cancer surgery.

What does that have to do with people taking off Friday's and Monday's due to "migraines" and "back pain."

[Ominous Gamer]

What does that have to do with people taking off Friday's and Monday's due to "migraines" and "back pain."

Simply filling in the missing facts to your usual half assed attempts to tell a story using only a small fraction of the information. Combined with your lack of critical thinking skills and lumping all migraine and back pains suffers into some sort of evil and lazy bunch.

Actually, it's far less than STD/LTD. and yes it is tracked, but FMLA also regains time so, while yes you aint getting paid for it, some people are just fine taking less home occasionally, but not working the 40/week and being job protected.

Far less in what sense? paperwork?

If employees are taking multiple days off a week through out the year its usually something that HR will look into, just as if someone was abusing disability. And I'd venture to guess that its going to showup in other ways while working. It doesn't have to mean someone is gaming the system, or the system is gamed enough to get rid of it.

[Veldan Rath]

Woe to the HR team that goes after someone out while on FMLA.

But yes, FMLA has a much lower paperwork burden than non statutory STD.

Also, I wasn't trying to imply that there is rampant abuse, just that it can be easy to do so.

My job allows me to see FMLA (and associated State and Company leaves), and it can be a nightmare to manage, thus my job exists.

[Aimless]

What does that have to do with people taking off Friday's and Monday's due to "migraines" and "back pain."

why the "quotes"?

[RandBlade]

Because its a quote. People claim to have a "migraine" but don't really.

[Aimless]

Because its a quote. People claim to have a "migraine" but don't really.

Citation needed, the scientific kind rather than the grammatical kind. You know, doctors' assessments, medical records, sworn testimonies, that sort of thing. Believe it or not there are people who actually have migraines and back pains, and others have other problems. How's their mental health? How's the workplace? I mean "workplace"

[Loki]

Citation needed, the scientific kind rather than the grammatical kind. You know, doctors' assessments, medical records, sworn testimonies, that sort of thing. Believe it or not there are people who actually have migraines and back pains, and others have other problems. How's their mental health? How's the workplace? I mean "workplace"

Is there a type of migraine and back pain that only flares up right before and after weekends and holidays?

[Nessus]

Is there a type of migraine and back pain that only flares up right before and after weekends and holidays?

So where's the line between reasonable demand for free-time behaviour modification to suit the whims of the employer? If someone who has a migraine that's mostly flared by alcohol and related things, their migraine isn't as valid a reason to miss work as the migraine of someone who's trigger is something less in their control? How much power does the employer enjoy vis a vis behaviours based on employee health? Does the employer get to say how many Big Macs you can eat per month (assuming your contract is long enough to warrant concern over long-term health like that)? Do we have special companies to assess your behavioural health consequences and have everyone act accordingly?

How do you separate between the migraines that are genuinely flared by alcohol and ones that aren't, if the distinction is meaningful?

[Aimless]

Is there a type of migraine and back pain that only flares up right before and after weekends and holidays?

Weekend headache isn't exactly an unknown clinical entity, but there appear to be important psychosocial, behavioral environmental components. Ie. psychological aspects of the patient and features of the work (or home!) environment that either provoke or aggravate the symptoms or make the patient feel more incapacitated due to his symptoms. For some people relaxation after stress can provoke migraine.

Wrt. back pain there may or may not be a great mystery in back pain progressively becoming worse for every day of leisure-free stressful back-killing work and then becoming better after three days of rest.

As a rule of thumb, missing work in this way is an clue to both the severity of symptoms as well as to the person's ability to cope with them, which in turn is influenced by eg. his psyche and his environment. It may also signal more severe problems such as substance abuse/addiction and/or depression/exhaustion. Or a crappy work environment featuring wonderful things like bullying and severe effort/reward imbalance.

[Ominous Gamer]

Which is why I like how the FMLA leaves the diagnosis to the professionals, and not at the whims of the employer.

How an employee qualifies for FMLA using the medicial reason:

Inpatient care (i.e., an overnight stay) in a hospital, hospice, or residential medical-care facility, including any period of incapacity (i.e., inability to work, attend school, or perform other regular daily activities) or subsequent treatment in connection with such inpatient care; or
Continuing treatment by a health care provider, which includes:
(1) A period of incapacity lasting more than three consecutive, full calendar days, and any subsequent treatment or period of incapacity relating to the same condition that also includes:

· treatment two or more times by or under the supervision of a health care provider (i.e., in-person visits, the first within 7 days and both within 30 days of the first day of incapacity); or

· one treatment by a health care provider (i.e., an in-person visit within 7 days of the first day of incapacity) with a continuing regimen of treatment (e.g., prescription medication, physical therapy); or

(2) Any period of incapacity related to pregnancy or for prenatal care. A visit to the health care provider is not necessary for each absence; or

(3) Any period of incapacity or treatment for a chronic serious health condition which continues over an extended period of time, requires periodic visits (at least twice a year) to a health care provider, and may involve occasional episodes of incapacity. A visit to a health care provider is not necessary for each absence; or

(4) A period of incapacity that is permanent or long-term due to a condition for which treatment may not be effective. Only supervision by a health care provider is required, rather than active treatment; or

(5) Any absences to receive multiple treatments for restorative surgery or for a condition that would likely result in a period of incapacity of more than three days if not treated.

Not only do you have to have a doctor's note to leave, you need one to come back, and you sign to allow the employer to request medical records in relation to the illness (at least here).

[Lewkowski]

Which is why I like how the FMLA leaves the diagnosis to the professionals, and not at the whims of the employer.

How an employee qualifies for FMLA using the medicial reason:


Not only do you have to have a doctor's note to leave, you need one to come back, and you sign to allow the employer to request medical records in relation to the illness (at least here).

The problem is that no one goes after the doctors for fraudulently helping someone qualify for FMLA. Well that and large companies tend to be spooked about juries providing ridiculous damages just to stick it to them.

[Lewkowski]

So where's the line between reasonable demand for free-time behaviour modification to suit the whims of the employer? If someone who has a migraine that's mostly flared by alcohol and related things, their migraine isn't as valid a reason to miss work as the migraine of someone who's trigger is something less in their control? How much power does the employer enjoy vis a vis behaviours based on employee health? Does the employer get to say how many Big Macs you can eat per month (assuming your contract is long enough to warrant concern over long-term health like that)? Do we have special companies to assess your behavioural health consequences and have everyone act accordingly?

How do you separate between the migraines that are genuinely flared by alcohol and ones that aren't, if the distinction is meaningful?

How about you show up when your supposed to and if you don't then you get canned? Most companies will go out of their way to keep superior employees and work with extenuating circumstances.

[Loki]

So where's the line between reasonable demand for free-time behaviour modification to suit the whims of the employer? If someone who has a migraine that's mostly flared by alcohol and related things, their migraine isn't as valid a reason to miss work as the migraine of someone who's trigger is something less in their control? How much power does the employer enjoy vis a vis behaviours based on employee health? Does the employer get to say how many Big Macs you can eat per month (assuming your contract is long enough to warrant concern over long-term health like that)? Do we have special companies to assess your behavioural health consequences and have everyone act accordingly?

How do you separate between the migraines that are genuinely flared by alcohol and ones that aren't, if the distinction is meaningful?

I don't think you understand how this works. It's not that the migraine is flared by drink; it's that people make up sicknesses to get longer weekends/holidays. You might not see this kind of behavior, because you work in an area where people actually like what they're doing. That's not the case with most fast food and retail jobs (and low-level corporate jobs), where playing sick is common.

[Nessus]

I don't think you understand how this works. It's not that the migraine is flared by drink; it's that people make up sicknesses to get longer weekends/holidays. You might not see this kind of behavior, because you work in an area where people actually like what they're doing. That's not the case with most fast food and retail jobs (and low-level corporate jobs), where playing sick is common.

I know that people do abuse it. But I also know people whose problems are mainly caused by alcohol consumption, and it seems unfair that they're penalized for behaviour that for instance I am free to engage in. The people feigning illness to hide alcohol dependence, fuck them.

[CitizenCain]

How's their mental health? How's the workplace? I mean "workplace"

And don't think that's not the other side of the coin, of course. People who like their job and their workplace generally don't skip work. If an employer has a problem with this kind of behavior, it's a fair bet that either they have a shitty environment, or we're talking about the kind of labor that's just never going to result in people loving their jobs. Either can be handled/managed by the employer spending more money to make the working environment better, but I guess it's easier to bitch to the nearest politician and try to complain that a bunch of high school dropouts are outsmarting you. <shrug>

How about you show up when your supposed to and if you don't then you get canned?

Because it's cheaper not to, obviously.

[RandBlade]

Last I checked slavery and indentured servitude were abolished centuries ago. Here's a simple solutionif you don't like your workplace: quit.

If you'd rather not quit perhaps it's time to realise that the workplace is for work, it's not a social club. It's something you're PAID to do. If you don't like it then the doors over there.

[Aimless]

Last I checked slavery and indentured servitude were abolished centuries ago. Here's a simple solutionif you don't like your workplace: quit.

If you'd rather not quit perhaps it's time to realise that the workplace is for work, it's not a social club. It's something you're PAID to do. If you don't like it then the doors over there.

Is your workplace a place for getting bullied?

[Ominous Gamer]

doctors for fraudulently helping someone qualify for FMLA. Well that and large companies tend to be spooked about juries providing ridiculous damages just to stick it to them.

Most companies will go out of their way to keep superior employees and work with extenuating circumstances.

so you don't trust doctors to perform within their profession, but you trust employers to not use health conditions as a way to reduce payroll or insurance costs?

yeah, thats logical

[Loki]

so you don't trust doctors to perform within their profession, but you trust employers to not use health conditions as a way to reduce payroll or insurance costs?

yeah, thats logical

Employers have an incentive to maintain a certain quality of a working environment. Doctors have virtually no incentive to stand up to their patients and claim they're not sick.

[GGT]

I don't think you understand how this works. It's not that the migraine is flared by drink; it's that people make up sicknesses to get longer weekends/holidays. You might not see this kind of behavior, because you work in an area where people actually like what they're doing. That's not the case with most fast food and retail jobs (and low-level corporate jobs), where playing sick is common.

When it's a pattern of behavior without a real medical basis, that's called Malingering. There will always be some people who do that, and it's usually co-workers who see it first, and complain to bosses. Only a physician (and not doctor-hopping) can make that distinction.

Plus, those low wage workers probably don't have good employer health insurance, or more than state-mandated paid sick time off. But they can still be fired for a bad attendance record. That doesn't say much for the part-timer working min. wage who really does have a health problem, and can't afford/get good care.

[Khendraja'aro]

Employers have an incentive to maintain a certain quality of a working environment. Doctors have virtually no incentive to stand up to their patients and claim they're not sick.

Again, that's why we have the Amtsarzt in Germany: An independent doctor, legally required to be thus and also employed by a governmental agency, who examines people where the employer has become distrustful as to whether the person in question is actually sick. (The Amtsarzt also doubles as an examiner in case you want to be employed in a public institution like a school - he checks, for example, if you're a carrier of TBC)

However, the employer only gets told whether the illness is genuine or not. He is not allowed to tell the actual illness itself - and you as an employee are equally not required to disclose the nature of your illness. It's also not a bright idea of an employer to try to blackmail his employees into divulging such information. The fines for such behaviour are very steep.

[GGT]

Again, that's why we have the Amtsarzt in Germany: An independent doctor, legally required to be thus and also employed by a governmental agency, who examines people where the employer has become distrustful as to whether the person in question is actually sick.

However, the employer only gets told whether the illness is genuine or not. He is not allowed to tell the actual illness itself - and you as an employee are equally not required to disclose the nature of your illness. It's also not a bright idea of an employer to try to blackmail his employees into divulging such information. The fines for such behaviour are very steep.

I'm not sure the US has an equivalent. We don't have government employed physicians outside state departments of health or federal agencies. And they're not the kind of primary-care providers a business could/would turn to if/when there's a dispute about Absenteeism for legitimate medical reasons. hmm


Decades ago, there were company/corporate/industrial physicians or nursing staff. It started as a "primary service" for the workers needing injury treatment, when the machinery or labor environment was very dangerous, but it also helped the employers avoid class-action law suits and industry-related regulations.

I'm not totally sure about this, but my impression is that today's larger modern employers (the ones who also subsidize employee health insurance) are given a very hefty discount for their liability/casualty/health insurance policies....if they have just one nurse on duty per shift. Sometimes that means just the ability to "call" an on-staff nurse who can give them advice. We all know that might mean a phone call to a phone bank in India.

Industrial, Occupational, and Public Health nurses may have very good input about how to avoid work-related injuries or hazards, but are smacked down by being told that's not their job or it's outside their job description.

After that point, everyone is subjected to some higher entity with authority powers. In the US, that usually means the employer.

[RandBlade]

Is your workplace a place for getting bullied?

No, zero tolerance for bullying.

[Ominous Gamer]

Employers have an incentive to maintain a certain quality of a working environment.

This is arguable, at best, for the benefit of the subject concerning the criteria we've discussed so far. Nonspecialized positions are rarely afforded such considerations, and the larger the business gets the easier it gets to place work environment lower on the priority, especially as you move down the ladder. Just look at WalMart, inadequate health insurance and their simple presence "Depresses area wages....pushes out more retail jobs than it creates
Your statement could also be taken to mean that the employer replaces the employee currently using medical leave in order to ease the workload or bitching from the subject's coworkers, or employees are dropped in order to get cheaper insurance for the company as a whole.

Doctors have virtually* no incentive to stand up to their patients and claim they're not sick.

*weasel word
Doctors can be and are disbarred for falsifying conditions, they can be and are arrested for such practices. There are plenty of incentives for a doctor to do his job properly.

[Aimless]

No, zero tolerance for bullying.

And yet it is among the greatest work-environment problems in the Western world. It's almost as if people shouldn't be happy at work

[Ominous Gamer]

Also important to note that the most common response is reactive to an existing problem, and rarely concerns itself with the victim once the "problem" is removed.

[GGT]

This is arguable, at best, for the benefit of the subject concerning the criteria we've discussed so far. Nonspecialized positions are rarely afforded such considerations, and the larger the business gets the easier it gets to place work environment lower on the priority, especially as you move down the ladder.

Just look at WalMart, inadequate health insurance and their simple presence "Depresses area wages....pushes out more retail jobs than it creates

Your statement could also be taken to mean that the employer replaces the employee currently using medical leave in order to ease the workload or bitching from the subject's coworkers, or employees are dropped in order to get cheaper insurance for the company as a whole.

*weasel word

Doctors can be and are disbarred for falsifying conditions, they can be and are arrested for such practices. There are plenty of incentives for a doctor to do his job properly.

Any ethical "incentive" can be destroyed by freee market theories, if making money is the end-all and be-all.