Stress Leave??

[DoubleD]

We're an American based company and I've never been to Europe so I don't honestly know the work climate their. I'm hoping some of you with international work experience can give me some insight.

I'm sitting in a meeting yesterday, and I hear that one of our European associates is out on Stress Leave. I think to myself, that's funny, I've never heard of Stress Leave. How do you get that? Is it common in Europe? Do you have to have a nervous breakdown? How stressed do I have to be before I can go on leave for it?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated to help me understand where this is coming from.

Pain is stress leaving the body.

DoubleD

 

[CasperTFG]

We have it in Canada too...

Basically you need a doctor to write up a note that says working at your present job is giving you an unhealthy level of stress. Then you go on stress or short term leave. In Canada that can also be extended to long term leave. The company doesn't have to pay you, you can collect unemployment, and you may also get health insurance money.

I know 3 people that have all gone on stress leave and each one of them destroyed their careers... 1) came back from stress leave and moved from project managment to customer support. 2 others tried to find work elsewhere while on leave, but when an employer asks you so what have you been doing for the last 3 months... It's hard to explain that to them.

Would you hire someone that screwed a company over by going on stress leave?


Casper

There is room for all of gods creatures, "Right Beside the Mashed Potatoes".

 

[adrianjohnson]

Not sure if it's the same thing, but here in the UK a doctor can sign you off work with stress. Sometimes, but not every time, work is the cause. It's normally other factors causing the stress, so people just need time to get themselves back together again.

My wife was signed off with stress for 6 months, and that was over 10 years ago. Her dad's heart transplant was the trigger, though she kept going to work, but collapsed at work, so the doctor signed her off. Mind you, she's the sort of person who gives 110% to any job.

Adrian Johnson
Assystance - i.t. solutions

http://www.assystance.com

 

[CasperTFG]

Would you hire someone that screwed a company over by going on stress leave?

I should say... It's not that the person went on leave to screw over the company, though 1 person of those 3 Did. It's just that usually when your level of stress at work is highest is because you are busy... And leaving when your plate is full puts more of a burden on the company and it is seen as though you are screwing them over.

Casper

There is room for all of gods creatures, "Right Beside the Mashed Potatoes".

 

[adrianjohnson]

You've got to be careful when dealing with stress, as there will be people trying to pull one over the company, just as much as there are companies taking advantage over staff (which can cause the stress). And then there are the genuine cases.

In the UK it's easy to get signed off with stress, and you don't have to prove it. Then the missues gets signed off with it, and proves it in a dramatic way!

Adrian Johnson
Assystance - i.t. solutions

http://www.assystance.com

 

[chiph]

I've been known to take some of my accumulated sick time and take a "wellness Friday", but nothing like this.

Chip H.


____________________________________________________________________
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

 

[willir]

Many European countries and Canada tend to be a little more liberal or employee orientated compared to the US.

For example, a very good US friend of mine got all of 6 weeks for maternity leave for each of her two kids. Over in a blink.

In Canada, the mother gets 17 weeks maternity leave. Then, the parents may share up to another 37 weeks (but usually, Mom takes the time off). This often works out to a whole year for Mom and child to bond.

This leave / absence is funded though the federal govenment unemployment insurence plan. Some companies may top up the short comings between UI or EU and the regular wages.

As far as I know, there is no "legal" law on stress leave, but many / some companies will support it. Depends on the employee / employer contract, Union, etc. Lawyers may get involved.

As far as I can see, per the (Canadian) "STANDARD HOURS, WAGES, VACATIONS AND HOLIDAYS" does not explicitly fund this type of absence...

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/l-2/17658.html

Yes, there is abuse of the system (for stress leave / sick leave) -- I have seen it done -- but this is a very dangerous thing to do -- the three cases I was aware of ended up very badly for the person who abused the system -- they pretty much became unemployable. Short term gain for long term pain.

...Taxes
Countries with more liberal policies on leave, ie., countries that provide funding for this type of leave (and health), will have higher taxes -- the money has to come from some where.

 

[CasperTFG]

In Canada it falls under Sick Leave. You get un-employment.

But even with Un-employment you only get 55% of your original wage. With maternity it is even worse. You get 55% of your average earnings up to a maximum amount of $413 per week.

The $413 would mena that you were originally earning 30K a year, below poverty.



Casper

There is room for all of gods creatures, "Right Beside the Mashed Potatoes".

 

[KenCunningham]

Fortunately, living in the UK we have a civilised arrangement whereby 'stress' is recognised as an illness and we therefore get leave to cover it - it's called the National Health Service. Our cousins over the pond have obviously gone another route - good luck to 'em!

 

[DoubleD]

I have heard from several sources that the European business culture is more employee oriented than the US, ie Vacation, Leave, etc. There seems to be a slight trend in America to open up employee benefits, unfortunately it isn't gaining enough momentum yet.
I believe a happy employee is a much more productive employee and will do whatever I can to support my associates. Sometimes that gets your hand slapped, but overall I feel its worth it.

Pain is stress leaving the body.

DoubleD

 

[jrbarnett]

Two years ago I spent 5 months as a temp covering for somebody on sick leave caused due to stress.
KenCunningham's experience bears me out in that it was covered under employee sick leave arrangements, and as such was paid up to the maximum duration permitted on there.

John

 

[celeron895]

Stress leave? What a joke. If you get a certain amount of sick time, then I suppose stress should be allowed to fall under that. But a special leave for stress... suck it up and get back to work. People complain too much nowadays.

 

[Onyxpurr]

Was that a joke celeron?

I think it's just like anything else...some people honestly do need it and some people deceptively do.

I think maternity lave in the states is dependent upon the state. I'm in AZ and we get up to 3 months off? (Haven't had a baby yet, so I keep forgetting if it's 3 or 6 months.) I take my sick and vacation time at full pay and then after that I get disability insurance up to the maximum allowable time off. Of course, the only problem is now I have a child and no time left to take when I get back.

Anyway, I digress...I think sick time could be used if you were stressed but in US you're only allowed about 40 hours of sick time. Unless you go on disbility (which could be approved by a doctor) and then depending on your insurance you could get paid a portion of your usual salary or nothing at all.

 

[BJCooperIT]

... suck it up and get back to work.

That is pretty harsh. Perhaps you have never had to deal with an extremely stressful time in your life. Lucky you.

I needed something like stress leave years ago. My mother had just died, my father was in the hospital near death, my husband was cheating on me and my daughter needed surgery. My employer only offered counseling sessions with a psychologist for stressed out employees. That was at least something, but not what I needed. I needed time to grieve, time to say my goodbyes, time to kick his butt to the curb and time to take care of my child. "Sucking it up" was not an option.

^{Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance. ~George Bernard Shaw}
Systems Project Analyst/Custom Forms & PL/SQL - Oracle/Windows

 

[Stella740pl]

BJCooperIT,
Stress from work or from cheating spouse, of course don't qualify, but to take care of sick parents or children (or a newborn, for that matter), and for some other circumstanses you can take now FMLA - Family and Medical Leave of Absence, unpaid, up to 12 weeks once a year (don't remember the year when this act passed). That is, if your company has more than 50 employees and you have worked for the company for at least 1 year. A company may request to substitute that with your accumulated paid leave, or in some cases you may be covered under some other paid programs and insurances (unemployment, disability, etc.)

Onyxpurr,
40 hours of sick time? Or you mean for stress only?
I guess, amount of sick time depends on the company. I used to have 70 or 80, don't remember, cannot be accumulated if unused. At this job I have 84 hours of paid sick time, can be accumulated over the years. Can be used all at once for newborn care or other special cases. Otherwise, no more than 2 days at once without doctor's notice. But we don't have short-term disability, though.

Stella

 

[CasperTFG]

... suck it up and get back to work.

When people suck it up and get back to work, isn't that when they usually come back to work with a gun?

Okay that's the extreeme... But there are cases where people need stress leave.

Casper

There is room for all of gods creatures, "Right Beside the Mashed Potatoes".

 

[SQLSister]

stella, of course the kicker in that FMLA is the unpaid part. I couldn't afford to take 12 weeks of unpaid leave no matter how much stress I was under. Most people in the work force couldn't take one week of unpaid leave without getting in financial trouble.

celeron895, like others I am appalled at the comment you made. Not only is this insensitive in the extreme, but it is not even a healthy way to act. If you don't find a way to deal overtly with stress, your body will make sure to force you to deal with it.

Questions about posting. See faq183-874

 

[jsteph]

But regardless of the law or company policy...in the real world if you take 'stress leave' you are sending a message that you can't handle the job. Harsh or not, that's the messge, and that's why person 1 in Casper's example got demoted to customer support (no picnic that, but in my opinion Project manager is a greater stress).

Sure, you get your stress leave, but then you come back to a less stressful (and lower paying) job. So the company gave you what you wanted--hey, they might get sued if you had a breakdown because the company didn't heed the warning signs and put you right back into the proven stressful position:

"Your honor, my client was forced into the same job that caused this documented medical condition and had a second episode and now he's permanantly disabled."

Take a day as a sick day and relax. "I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be"

If you need weeks and weeks--it's called burnout and you need to think about your career choice. I could have been a professional pitcher, but my arm would ache a week after a relatively light 100 pitch game, and I wouldn't be ready for another game for 2 weeks. Should a team hire me anyway? I wouldn't if I were a team owner.
--Jim

 

[willir]

Interesting....

A lot of polarization in this thread.

Who is the boss?
I guess firstly, market conditions change. There are several "bosses", and who is the big boss will depend on the current exonomy and cutlure. Not too long ago, if you were good at anthing .Net, you the employee was the boss. Now it seems to be the Stock Holders looking agressively at the bottom line who are the boss.

When markets swing in favour of the employee, employers will tend to be more accommodating towards the employee. As it stand now, there is a fair bit of abuse and leverage being applied against the employee in an attempt to improve the bottom line and impress investors.

Working Conditions
Many of us work in totally different conditions and cutlures.
- Some of us are young and green, some of us are nearing the end of our working life.
- Some work in a fairly relaxed job and some work in real pressure cookers.
- Some work for considerate employers and some work for employers who are ruthless.
- Some of us are highly skilled and highly sought after, and some of us are still learning.

There are various reasons for these Yin and Yang, but I feel it would detract from the point of this discussion to delve on the details.

I suspect that some will have strong opinions on which side of the see-saw you stand.

...But please realize that this forum we come from all walks of life when making your comments.

...Moving on -- Stress Leave

There is no right answer. It depends

Would I be correct in saying that ...
- Ruthless employers and employers with little tolerance, especially in a market that favours the bottom line, and where there is less legeslation in favour of employees, the tendency will be to discard non-productive employees including those who are highly stressed. They may instill more fear in their employees, subject employees to more stress, have a higher turn-over and have very little "dead wood".

- In some cases, Unions, employee contacts will have an agreement where the employee can take sick leave.

- Some people will abuse the "system" - whether they are plain lazy, dissatisfied, greedy or their personal lifestyle is more important than their career.

- There are some people who are less hardy -- damaged from a troubled childhood, a victum of abuse, severe lack of confidence, or have other serious "baggage" that may impct performance. Some may say that these people may need hand holding to reach their potential and become productive.

- Some employees may have had a set back, a recent period of very high stress, a prolonged period with a heavy workload, or a temparary medical situation including post partum depression, a problem with addiction. What about coping with a stess job and a stressful divorce at the same time?


So let me ask you...
- With all things being equal, would you work better for a company that treated you with professionalism and appreciation, or a company that treated you more of a disosable resource?

- If you abuse the system, are you helping yourself in the long run, and are you helping your colleagues by your actions?

- If it was you suffering from high stress, and seriously overwhelmed, would a small "break" be benificial to you instead of "starting over again". (and I am not talking about those who are as "tough as nails" and think every one else should be too.)

- If you are a company with a known reputation for being tough, do you feel the loss of these types of employees is acceptable, and do you think you can always find new employees with the same skill set. Is the cost of training a new employee more acceptable than the cost of additional employee benefits.

I personally feel, in some situations, sick leave / stress leave is an excellent vehicle to help an employee through a tough time. However, certain controls must be in place to prevent abuse. Implementing these controls is tough because of confidentiality issues and respect for the employee that must exist for the plan to be successsful.

Cheers all... stay healthy

 

[jsteph]

willr,
My comments were a generalization, to be sure, and perhaps I should have been more specific. I agree that if, say, an employee's spouse dies then yes, a 'stress leave' is not only due--it should be insisted upon.

I guess what I mean is that the company should implement 'as a rule' no stress leave, and then the 'exception' would be the severe family emergency (death of spouse, etc) or some similar episode.

What I believe is more common are 2 things:
1. Someone just plain not cut out for the job.
2. Outright abuse/lazyness.

#1 is what I was referring to in general--someone may show talent in brief spurts or in the beginning, but simply may not have the long-term stamina to do the work day-in day-out for years. Giving this person a 'stress leave' of 6 weeks (in addition to vacation) every year would, in my opinion, be too great an interruption of workflow and too costly in manhours.

Remember Business 101, the Top 3 purposes of a business are:
1. Make a profit for the owners.
2. Make a profit for the owners.
3. Make a profit for the owners.

It might be nice if the top rules were (and these are common incorrect answers to the above top 3): To provide a product or service; To Employ people; To be nice and happy and smiley. But those simply don't figure in the top 3.

My aforementioned situation was a perfect analogy--I threw in the high 80's in my late teens and had a hammer of a curveball, but I couldn't stay in rotation. A team can't be expected to put up with that. Nor can a company be expected to put up with an entitlement of a 'stress leave'. Again--in verifyable extreme circumstances, yes, it's a good investment to eat a month or even 2 of employee downtime for a good employee.
--jim