Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Possible Harassment

Possible Harassment

Postby Legaleye » Sat Mar 12, 2016 11:47 am

I was retired ill health from the fire brigade in 2010, one of the conditions of an ill health retirement is that the fire authority can require you to have a medical whenever they choose until you are 60.
I am now 56, I had a medical in 2013 where the doctor agreed I was still unfit for work, at that time the HR advisor required me to fill out a form requesting details of financial matters since leaving the fire brigade ie what jobs I had done and the amount of payment I had received for those jobs, she said it was the doctor who requested this information to help him reach his decision, I refused at the time to give this information and although the doctor had the forms on his desk he did not ask me why I had not provided the information (I believe it was the HR advisor that requires this info not the doctor).
This time the forms are even more personal, she wants full details of, employment since leaving the fire brigade, educational/vocational qualifications and training since leaving the fire brigade, she also wants to know if I claim any social security benefits due to my injury ( industrial injuries benifit, incapacity benifit, sever disablement allowance or disablement gratuity).
I am more than happy to have a medical and have signed the forms to allow the fir brigade doctor to access my medical records, but I don't see any reason why she should request any further details of a confidential nature.
I have left the pages blank about any employment, training or qualifications I have gained since leaving the fire brigade, I have also not answered the questions about any social security benefits I am on, I intend to ask the doctor when I have my follow up medical why he requires this information, if he says it is not him but HR that request it, could I have a case for harassment under the Protection from Harassment 1997 act, given the history between HR and myself in 2013?

Legaleye

Edit. In 2013 when I refused to give work/financial information the HR advisor rang me several times insisting I give her the information she requested, some of these calls got very vociferous.
Legaleye
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby 3.14 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:37 pm

What does your employment contract say about it?
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby Legaleye » Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:53 pm

3.14 wrote:What does your employment contract say about it?

That anyone given an ill health pension can be called in for a medical if they are under 60 or they have been in receipt of the pension for less than 10 years, I am under 60 and also 56. Her opening letter actually says I am legally obliged to answer the questions.
I assume by 'legally obliged' there should be some act saying so?

Legaleye
Legaleye
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby 3.14 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:13 pm

I imagine you need to ask her under what legislation, you are obliged to answer the questions.
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby Legaleye » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:24 pm

Thank you 3.14, I intend to ask that question after my medical with the fire brigade doctor, if she can't quote any legislation I intend to make a formal complaint sighting the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Just for your information, when I had my follow up medical in 2013, the fire brigade doctor couldn't have been nicer, he asked what medication I'm on for pain relief and that was it, he didn't examine me at all, I was in and out of his office in less than 10 mins.

Thanks again

Legaleye
Legaleye
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby atticus » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:59 pm

You are wrong to assume legal obligation may only arise under a statute. You have entered into a contract. A contract is a set of legal obligations.

Failing to attend for medical examination or to answer these questions may affect your right to be paid a pension, or the terms on which you are paid. Do think about where your obstinacy may lead.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19410
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby Legaleye » Sat Mar 12, 2016 4:47 pm

Thanks Atticus.
I will tread carefully, I do think however that should I be legally obliged to answer the questions posed, the HR advisor would have insisted I do so in 2013 when I refused, obviously I will not risk losing any of my pension.

Legaleye
Legaleye
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby dls » Tue Mar 15, 2016 3:51 pm

I do think however that should I be legally obliged to answer the questions posed, the HR advisor would have insisted I do so in 2013 when I refused

You either have an obligation or not. It is for the person asserting an obligation to support the assertion with justification.

You might consider a reply on the basis that: "I have no wish to provide this information, and know of no obligation to do do. I will happily reconsider if you can show me where such an obligation arises.'
The relationship you have with such a former employer may be very detailed and extensive. Do not assume they have not got this somewhere
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12076
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby Hairyloon » Tue Mar 15, 2016 4:30 pm

dls wrote:Do not assume they have not got this somewhere

I think it a fair assumption that a busybody HR department has made it up, but one should never put significant weight on any unconfirmed assumption.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9883
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Possible Harassment

Postby Millbrook2 » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:18 pm

Hairyloon wrote:
dls wrote:Do not assume they have not got this somewhere

I think it a fair assumption that a busybody HR department has made it up, but one should never put significant weight on any unconfirmed assumption.


A point not worth making then and very unhelpful to the OP even with the caveat.

HR usually have enough to do without making things up. The correct course of action is as dls outlined and if it cannot be justified fair enough. However consider that the request is being made for a reason. I would assume it's to assess continued entitlement to an ill health pension given you are under 60.

I'm a bit out of touch but my recollection is that ill health pensions can be reviewed if the person is able to do work of some kind or deemed to be fit to do work even if they are not working at the time.

Tread carefully.
Millbrook2
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:05 am

Next

Return to Torts - Negligence, Defamation and others

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron