Sick Days & AMP

[Pinga]

what is an "attendance management program". I know my employers have consistently requested that we stay home if sick, and managers have supported that.

 

[Jaebius]

what is an "attendance management program". I know my employers have consistently requested that we stay home if sick, and managers have supported that.

We have to stay home if we'r sick. If we come in sick, the boss will send us straight home.

 

[Luce NDs]

Does it indicate something if the leader comes in sick ... an illness of character attributes?

 

[Seeler]

Many companies have ways of discouraging people from taking sick-time off. And parttime or temporary workers who work for an hourly wage don't get paid for hours not worked. A bad cold or flu might mean no pay cheque for the week; pretty hard on minimum wage workers.

 

[Pinga]

@Seeler, I don't know of a company that doesn't encourage its folks to be at home when sick. I don't doubt they exist, but, I wonder if anyone has any personal stories of such companies. Might be an interesting thread.

 

[Mendalla]

@Seeler, I don't know of a company that doesn't encourage its folks to be at home when sick. I don't doubt they exist, but, I wonder if anyone has any personal stories of such companies. Might be an interesting thread.

We used to have a program where you got little bonuses (extra vacation day or a day's pay) if you only used 1 or 0 days of sick time. It got cancelled a couple years ago but that was definitely NOT an incentive to use your sick time and stay home. Some people also got into the trick of flexing (if in a position where it was allowed) or using vac for sick time.

 

[Pinga]

Sure, that was the old way. Your company doesn't do that now, though. I am curious of current situations. (note: 25 years ago I remember having a discussion with our HR director how "sick days" actually encouraged people to come in sick, and consume sick days when healthy.

 

[Mendalla]

Sure, that was the old way.

If you define "two years ago" as "old". If we were still doing it that recently (and, to be honest, it took the owner's death and the arrival of a new administration to change it), I'm sure there are others who still are.

 

[Pinga]

Understood. 2 years is not old. I have used "a couple of years" , then realized it was 5 or 10. if it was only 2 years, that is fairly recent.

 

[paradox3]

@Seeler, I don't know of a company that doesn't encourage its folks to be at home when sick. I don't doubt they exist, but, I wonder if anyone has any personal stories of such companies. Might be an interesting thread.

Having worked for a hospital with an AMP, I can tell you we received mixed messages from our employer. They were quick to tell us we were not to come in to work sick & this is mandated by law in certain situations.

However, there was an elaborate system of warning letters & "counselling sessions" which came into effect if an employee's use of sick days surpassed a certain threshold.

AMP's are very common in the public sector. . . .hospitals, municipalities, universities, etc. An "acceptable" level of sick time is established based on historical usage. There is a predetermined number of separate incidents and total days which places an employee on the program. A certain number of acceptable cycles is required for "release" from the AMP.

"Counselling" might involve a referral to the EAP, problem solving about workplace issues, etc. The hospital insisted the process was not adversarial but most employees experienced it that way.

If you google the subject you will find lots of information for employers from management lawyers advising what is actually allowable. Human Rights Commissions have also weighed in. Unions have challenged them and arbitrators have ruled AMP's are allowable within various limits.

Employers will tell you that AMP's have successfully reduced sick days. AMP's are not based on culpable sick time (i.e. when an employee is known to be faking sick.) For culpable absenteeism progressive discipline is applied.

AMP's target innocent absenteeism. It is not very easy for employers to terminate for innocent absenteeism but it has happened. The onus is on the employer to demonstrate there is no prospect of reasonable attendance in the future.

We had a lengthy discussion about this on the original WC but that was a long time ago. I was working then and pretty fired up about the issue but I have been retired now for 5 years!

 

[paradox3]

We used to have a program where you got little bonuses (extra vacation day or a day's pay) if you only used 1 or 0 days of sick time. It got cancelled a couple years ago but that was definitely NOT an incentive to use your sick time and stay home. Some people also got into the trick of flexing (if in a position where it was allowed) or using vac for sick time.

In googling AMP's recently I came across a ruling from a Human Rights Commission that such incentives for good attendance can actually be discriminatory towards employees protected by the disability provisions of the Code. I think it was in Alberta.

 

[Mrs.Anteater]

Oh

Having worked for a hospital with an AMP, I can tell you we received mixed messages from our employer. They were quick to tell us we were not to come in to work sick & this is mandated by law in certain situations.

However, there was an elaborate system of warning letters & "counselling sessions" which came into effect if an employee's use of sick days surpassed a certain threshold.

AMP's are very common in the public sector. . . .hospitals, municipalities, universities, etc. An "acceptable" level of sick time is established based on historical usage. There is a predetermined number of separate incidents and total days which places an employee on the program. A certain number of acceptable cycles is required for "release" from the AMP.

"Counselling" might involve a referral to the EAP, problem solving about workplace issues, etc. The hospital insisted the process was not adversarial but most employees experienced it that way.

If you google the subject you will find lots of information for employers from management lawyers advising what is actually allowable. Human Rights Commissions have also weighed in. Unions have challenged them and arbitrators have ruled AMP's are allowable within various limits.

Employers will tell you that AMP's have successfully reduced sick days. AMP's are not based on culpable sick time (i.e. when an employee is known to be faking sick.) For culpable absenteeism progressive discipline is applied.

AMP's target innocent absenteeism. It is not very easy for employers to terminate for innocent absenteeism but it has happened. The onus is on the employer to demonstrate there is no prospect of reasonable attendance in the future.

We had a lengthy discussion about this on the original WC but that was a long time ago. I was working then and pretty fired up about the issue but I have been retired now for 5 years!

, yes, that has been established here a while ago, too. Has the effect that staff in hospitals comes to work sick. I haven’t had the problem, because I am usually fairly healthy, but my coworkers with young kids often end up going over the limit, because they first stay home to take care of the sick kids, then catch it themselves. I think, you get two days in total per year to look after sick kids. That doesn’t get you anywhere. I often work among people who should have stayed at home.
I believe, part of the program is, that instead of having the grace period of three days without neededing a doctors note, you have to have one from day one. So you have to go to emergency after having thrown up all night and sit there a couple of hours. You also get to talk to the boss.
That’s why people try to not end up on the program.

 

[paradox3]

A few more thoughts about my experience with the AMP.

In my last job I was placed on the AMP after a single absence of about 4 weeks for medical reasons This was over the threshold established by my employer so my manager was required to meet with me and give me a Step 1 letter. Because I raised some objections, she called in HR to assist her.

The HR person (old enough to be my daughter, but that's beside the point) explained to me that the purpose of the letter was to "raise my awareness." I asked her point blank "my awareness of what exactly?" and she had no answer. I asked her about the line in the letter which stated "I am confident you will be able to improve your attendance in the future."

How, I wondered, could my employer possibly predict my health status in the future? HR's response was "It is just a form letter."

I kid you not.

Under the AMP, it took me 3 six-month cycles of acceptable attendance before I got off the program. At this point, my manager was required to give me a letter which "released" me from the program and congratulated me on my improved attendance.

She seemed fairly uncomfortable with the process. To her credit, she never insisted on a doctor's letter to justify every single absence. . . the AMP gave her this latitude.

Back in the days of my management career, I learned that requiring such letters usually backfires for employers. Because it is a bother to get in to see a doctor, employees will often take a second day off. Or more, if they can't make an appointment immediately. And requiring such letters serves to educate employees about how easy they are to obtain. Most doctors don't wish to argue with their patients about whether they should be at work or not.

So fun to think about this again. It hasn't been on my mind for a few years now.

 

[Pinga]

thanks folks. In our small retreat centre and in my large corporate environments this has not been present for ever. I argue against sick days because it drives wrong behaviour. think this would be a good thread.

 

[paradox3]

Oh

, yes, that has been established here a while ago, too. Has the effect that staff in hospitals comes to work sick. I haven’t had the problem, because I am usually fairly healthy, but my coworkers with young kids often end up going over the limit, because they first stay home to take care of the sick kids, then catch it themselves. I think, you get two days in total per year to look after sick kids. That doesn’t get you anywhere. I often work among people who should have stayed at home.
I believe, part of the program is, that instead of having the grace period of three days without neededing a doctors note, you have to have one from day one. So you have to go to emergency after having thrown up all night and sit there a couple of hours. You also get to talk to the boss.
That’s why people try to not end up on the program.

Yes, I agree that the result is people come to work when they are sick and should be at home. The letters are viewed as punitive even if the hospital insists they are merely administrative in nature.

The doctor's note after one day was not automatic with my employer but the manager had the latitude to require it.

 

[paradox3]

thanks folks. In our small retreat centre and in my large corporate environments this has not been present for ever. I argue against sick days because it drives wrong behaviour. think this would be a good thread.

You are opposed to sick days? Do you mean that employees should not be paid for sick days?

 

[Mendalla]

In googling AMP's recently I came across a ruling from a Human Rights Commission that such incentives for good attendance can actually be discriminatory towards employees protected by the disability provisions of the Code. I think it was in Alberta.

Interesting. While my employer operates solely in Ontario (for now), other divisions in the group do operate nationally or even internationally so a decision in another province could still have been a.factor.

 

[paradox3]

thanks folks. In our small retreat centre and in my large corporate environments this has not been present for ever.

Seems to be more of a public sector thing. Some people are quite surprised to learn that hospitals have AMP's. Kind of ironic, right?

 

[Northwind]

I may have missed it, but I'm not sure what AMP stands for. I believe though, from reading posts, that my employer may have one.

We have a policy where if you have a certain number of sick "incidents" within a period of time, you get warnings or something. Our site manager has to be involved at some level. Someone in my position can get penalized for coming in for the morning and then going home three days in a row because we've had three "incidents" within a short time period. If we took three days in a row, that would only count for one incident. Often, people will come in to run group in the morning then go home if they are not feeling well. That is because of the commitment to the work we do, and to our clients. This process is a poor way to address the problem of people misusing sick time because it penalizes everyone.

It should be noted I work for a health care organization.

@Pinga I too would like some clarification on your statement that you are opposed to sick time.

 

[paradox3]

I may have missed it, but I'm not sure what AMP stands for. I believe though, from reading posts, that my employer may have one.

AMP = Attendance Management Program.

Yes, you are describing one exactly.