The Nazi cbg looking realy stupid!

HoneyBeetle 03-20-2010 08:58 PM

Acrued sick pay conditional? Rhode Island

The employee doesn't believe sick pay should be payed "conditionally" only upon providing a doctor's note. He wasn't told this upon taking the job. He never took a sick day before. The requirment is something new. He believes it is not only impractical to go to the doctor for a small illness, but not always reasonable (appointments are not given by his doctor "on demand" and appointments are not easy to get). Also, employee does not want to forefeit his right to privacy simply to bet a benefit that was promised without condition and already accrued on his pay stubb.

Can the state take the employee's sick pay for not getting a doctor's note?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cbg 03-20-2010 09:04 PM

If the state is the employer, yes, the state may require the employee to use sick pay if he does not bring in a doctor's note.

In the absence of a legally binding and enforceable contract that specifically says otherwise, it is the opt of the employer, not the employee, when sick time is applicable.
Uhm, Uhm Nazi excuse me, but you do realize you are answering a question in the union forum, and the employee is also a state employee? Just checking.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HoneyBeetle 03-21-2010 03:12 PM

This has nothing to do with when sick days are applied. It has to do with being compensated for a "benefit" that has "accrued" by the employer to the employee. The other part of the issue is making that benefit "conditioned" upon a note. If the bargain says nothing about a note being a condition of the benefit, I assume this is not binding under contract law.

However, the employee agreement is silent as to conditions and terms of sick pay. So, what are the terms of the agreement regarding requiring a "doctor's" note to get paid sick leave that is already provided in the employee's "account" as noted on the pay stub.

The contract only mentions the rate when sick pay accrues (or is given) to the employee, not the conditional term that it would be paid only and if a note is provided. This seems contrary to my understanding of basic contract law, yes?
It's good you reminded the supermoderator there is a contract, even though the forum is clearly marked Union. There are not many posters posting there though. The Nazi has banned them all or lock their threads to the point they just don't post.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cbg 03-21-2010 03:28 PM

This is the first time you've mentioned a contract. If you had done so initially, I would have told you that ONLY an attorney in your state who has read the contract in full can tell you whether the contract has been breached or not. I am not a mind reader and the percentage of employees who are actually working under contract is small.
There is nothing in employment law prohibiting the employer from doing what they are doing.

Well the poster assumed you realized that union implied a collective bargaining agreement. It should not take a mind reader to understand that you rude, nasty bitch! And no you do not go to an attorney; you exhaust the grievance machinery first, up to and including arbitration.