Some questions about bradford factor

14
Found 5th Jun 2016
Hi Guys,
My mum's work place is going on the Bradford factor system, in the memo they got it says it starts from July, but her manager is saying it’s started from last year, that can’t be right can it? And also if you happen to have a sick note from the Dr does that still make you accumulate the points as well?
Thanks for your time guys!

  1. Ask
  2. Bradford
14 Comments

Also re doctors notes -
"Doctors Notes and the Bradford Factor
The Bradford Factor includes all unplanned absence so absence with a Doctors note should still be considered in your Bradford Factor Calculations. A manager should use their discretion when reviewing absence on a 'case by case' basis and, if they feel the absence should not count, discard it from the Bradford Factor calculation. Good examples of this are absence as a result of work related stress, ongoing treatments like chemotherapy and periods following close family bereavement.
Remember: The Bradford Factor Index score should be a guide that supports your absence management strategy, it is not a like-for-like benchmark tool and each absence and staff member should be considered individually (their attitude, situation at work and home and historical absence record)".

my last workplace used the Bradford Factor, it was an absolute nightmare, causing tension and unease in the workplace with distrustful employers and frustrated employees.
I have moved to a different company after ten years and it is the world of difference. There is no Bradford Factor and trust and respect is there from all sides.

Like any changes to contract it must be agreed with the employee.
Retrospective changes are in breach of employment law and her employer should have informed her in writing about the changes and when they take effect.
If she is in a union they advise her / if she isn't then joining a large union such as UNISON would help clarify her position

BTW This stupid Bradford factor takes us back to Victorian practices and I'm amazed the TUC hasn't opposed it more strongly


Edited by: "sowotsdis" 5th Jun 2016

A strange system I recall somebody with 2 x 1 days off with migraine had a worse score than somebody with 1 sickness absence lasting 5 months!

If you go to work everyday you will have nothing to worry about. Yes if you are seriously ill you will be of work but some people just think it's ok to take the odd day off.

If you go to work everyday you will have nothing to worry about. Yes if … If you go to work everyday you will have nothing to worry about. Yes if you are seriously ill you will be of work but some people just think it's ok to take the odd day off.




this is exactly why the Bradford Factor exists

for a business - many short absences of a day or so are much more disruptive that someone who is on long term sickness

EliTom

Original Poster

thank you guys!!
I’ll go explain it all to her now.

once this kicks in i got a feeling people will start leaving there.

once again big thanks!

thank you guys!!I’ll go explain it all to her now.once this kicks in i g … thank you guys!!I’ll go explain it all to her now.once this kicks in i got a feeling people will start leaving there. once again big thanks!


It's not an issue unless you're a serial offender.

For example someone who has two lots of a month off will score less (better), than someone who takes 1 day off 5 times. It stops the slackers who we probably all know take the **** after a big weekend etc. There's no hard and fast rule either, it's all discretion so if there is a legitimate issue it's no problem. We use it and I don't know of anyone who's had a problem with it.

The BF works to find those who repeatedly take time off to take the mick. But it doesn't take into account genuine health issues etc. It cuts down the short term absences. But also increases the time people take off in one instance I've found.

We had this in our last sickness policy. HR have now agreed it is useless and are removing it when the policy s reviewed this month.

Most workplaces have a system for dealing with sickness. Inevitably those who have genuine illness feel penalised and those who take the mick seem to get away with it

The worst example I have come across is where they use Bradford scores as evidence in a general discipline case. Not one for sick absences but say for poor performance. it's just used as another nail in the coffin rather then a stand alone tool to manage sickness absences.

Bradford factor is pretty awful for one off absences, as you accumulate absences based on days off and instances of it happening. So you would accumulate less points for example by being off for 5 days in a row than 5 individual days.
It's not a very good system, there are much better ways of absence management but as its a widely available system many employers are reluctant to spend more on newer systems.
A retrospective introduction is not actually allowed if it's going to send people straight to formal action. When my employers introduced a new system they included all absences from the previous year though said they didn't count until the next absence under the new system. The reality of this was endless phone calls from managers that staff who were good with attendance felt penalised and that those with high absence were getting off Scot free as they could manipulate the system.

It's good in theory but abused in practice. Our work use it for banning employees from overtime. It just encourages you to take the whole week off instead or risking coming back early and having two instances. Anything after 1 minute lateness is classed as an absence. I argued my case when I got banned and found out my paternity week had been included which shouldn't of been on there. No one in the company would give the formula they use as well which is weird as I assumed it was a standard formula.

Makes me laugh when colleagues get asked in to work overtime due to the huge back log just for them to tell them you've banned me so I can't come in.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions

    Top Merchants