employers don't look happy, if employees are absent frequently due to illness. However, the chief may terminate due therefore disease?
The head is pounding, nose is running, and in the epigastric region is also very dull? Then you should report a better sick. However, many workers volunteered to go to work, because you don't want to be sick all the time. They fear that in case of frequent illness, the notice to the house flutters. However, this concern is justified?
termination due to frequent disease: should we be afraid of?
Yes and no. Right: If an employee is no longer capable of his job, may be terminated by the employer in relation to persons. This is for example the case if the employees work is because of his disease, capable or his performance drops.
The legal hurdles for a people-related redundancies are, however, very high , such as the Online Portal for career boost, writes:
"So there must be, among other things, a negative future prognosis. This is for example the case, when an alcohol-dependent workers are already provided in the past is not a sufficient performance – and for the future, no improvement is in sight. If the employee is to an undue operating or economic burden or disruption of the operating work processes for the future, it may terminate due to the employer people."
employees who are more than six weeks out of the year sick, are the cause of the high cost of continued payment of Wages. Therefore, workers, who are often sick, companies often unacceptable.
frequently ill - have item for the Chef to do
they Are often sick, you can turn your head, the health insurance Fund. These instruct the Medical service of the health insurances (MDK), to investigate the employees and to check its inability to work .
you might also be interested in:
Sick leave: Three mistakes that are, unfortunately, still.
Furthermore: to read you Would have known? This is allowed in spite of Sickness.
Andrea Stettner
