IDing sick leave abuse
06-28-2015, 09:59 AM
#1
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: ATL 717 A
Posts: 21
IDing sick leave abuse
Does anybody know what criteria the Company and MEC is using to identify what constitutes "sick leave abuse"?
On another thread, someone mentioned 50 or 60 abusers, but what's that based on? Not getting verification? Certain individuals using sick time at a certain time of year, such as shown at the road shows? What are they using as a measure of abuse?
Also, where is the Company and MEC getting the data comparing our sick leave usage to OALs. I would think that would be proprietary information.
I'm asking because this potential change in SL policy will be very troublesome for dudes like me. Since 2011, I've had three surgeries, two of them major, and I'm married to a pediatrician. She brings home nearly every new bug she sees. I refuse to fly sick (the worst flu I ever had was in 2012, after flying with a CA who showed up for the first leg of a three day saying he had strep throat. He called in sick day two, and a week later, I was toast for a month) and, though sometimes a bit of a chore, I can usually get the proper verification. Who/what is going to define "abuse" if this thing passes? Sedgwick?
Thanks.
On another thread, someone mentioned 50 or 60 abusers, but what's that based on? Not getting verification? Certain individuals using sick time at a certain time of year, such as shown at the road shows? What are they using as a measure of abuse?
Also, where is the Company and MEC getting the data comparing our sick leave usage to OALs. I would think that would be proprietary information.
I'm asking because this potential change in SL policy will be very troublesome for dudes like me. Since 2011, I've had three surgeries, two of them major, and I'm married to a pediatrician. She brings home nearly every new bug she sees. I refuse to fly sick (the worst flu I ever had was in 2012, after flying with a CA who showed up for the first leg of a three day saying he had strep throat. He called in sick day two, and a week later, I was toast for a month) and, though sometimes a bit of a chore, I can usually get the proper verification. Who/what is going to define "abuse" if this thing passes? Sedgwick?
Thanks.
06-28-2015, 10:27 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Posts: 329
So what's there not to get? You are given 270 hours a year of sick pay. If your sick use it if your not don't! Why does the contract have to change for a few alleged abusers if there is any? and have the change hurt the rest of us when we need to use sick and I'm not talking about head colds. I'm talking about chronic conditions or trying to get back your medical back. This change in the sick policy only hurts the guys that really need it. Vote No!
06-28-2015, 12:13 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Decoupled
Posts: 922
This was posted at Chitchat today. This pilot owns and operates a medical facility. He has made previous statements on medical privacy. Here is his latest.
"
This thread is in response to the patch job that DALPA is apparently working on with the company for Section 14 and 15.
Somehow, DALPA has created the perception of a threat to the privacy of our medical records. Although, there is always some risk of disclosure of medical records, THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. HIPAA DOES NOT MATTER.
If my entire medical records were on the front of the NY Times, I would be upset. And I certainly would have some legal recourse. But that is not why we should be concerned.
The ultimate concern is releasing your medical records (as a group, thousands of times a year) to a person or entity whose goals are not completely aligned with your best interests – be it health interests, financial interests, or mental health and general wellbeing.
The reason one doctor can speak to another doctor about your medical records without a HIPAA release is because it is assumed that both doctors have both your health interests and wellbeing interests as their ultimate priority.
Think about why the current doctor from DHS is leaving. Whereas before, DHS was used as an alternate means to help a pilot get back to work, DHS will now become a profit center designed to harass pilots, thereby reducing sick leave. Unfortunately, along with reducing sick leave, we expose ourselves to unknown risks that are just not necessary.
We currently release our medical records under very limited and specific instances. This TA will multiply that by a factor of 10 or 20. Make your own assumptions, but I come up with 8200 times per year, we the pilot group, will have to sign a medical release.
There are loopholes in this TA that no one can predict the outcomes, but two thing are crystal clear: 1) The company had some kind of advice from a disability-type company and 2) The negotiating committee got in over their head and are now trying to patch it up on the fly."
"
This thread is in response to the patch job that DALPA is apparently working on with the company for Section 14 and 15.
Somehow, DALPA has created the perception of a threat to the privacy of our medical records. Although, there is always some risk of disclosure of medical records, THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. HIPAA DOES NOT MATTER.
If my entire medical records were on the front of the NY Times, I would be upset. And I certainly would have some legal recourse. But that is not why we should be concerned.
The ultimate concern is releasing your medical records (as a group, thousands of times a year) to a person or entity whose goals are not completely aligned with your best interests – be it health interests, financial interests, or mental health and general wellbeing.
The reason one doctor can speak to another doctor about your medical records without a HIPAA release is because it is assumed that both doctors have both your health interests and wellbeing interests as their ultimate priority.
Think about why the current doctor from DHS is leaving. Whereas before, DHS was used as an alternate means to help a pilot get back to work, DHS will now become a profit center designed to harass pilots, thereby reducing sick leave. Unfortunately, along with reducing sick leave, we expose ourselves to unknown risks that are just not necessary.
We currently release our medical records under very limited and specific instances. This TA will multiply that by a factor of 10 or 20. Make your own assumptions, but I come up with 8200 times per year, we the pilot group, will have to sign a medical release.
There are loopholes in this TA that no one can predict the outcomes, but two thing are crystal clear: 1) The company had some kind of advice from a disability-type company and 2) The negotiating committee got in over their head and are now trying to patch it up on the fly."
06-28-2015, 01:40 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Plus I want to know what use, ever, would they have getting this "medical release" information?
You're never going to have to provide them a medical release until you are well into the threshold where you have to "verify" your illness anyway (almost always at your expense now, another face slapping concession).
So WTH can they ever learn with a release that they couldn't learn with a verification? And what are they, ever, going to do with that information versus not having it? The illness was either verified or not. What difference does the release make at that point?
What happens if you have to verify a legitimate illness that is, due to either when you attempted to verify it (condition passed by that time) or it was impossible to diagnose for sure (nausea/upset stomach with no other symptoms) that is therefore unverifiable to a third party?
What happens if you have to verify something that is unverifiable to a third party, and then they ask for a release, and there is nothing different on that release than on the verification?
Then what?
This sick policy is by far the worst part of this TA and opens up a huge can of worms to harrass us and make us fly sick for most if not all borderline conditions. It is worth a NO vote on this issue alone.
You're never going to have to provide them a medical release until you are well into the threshold where you have to "verify" your illness anyway (almost always at your expense now, another face slapping concession).
So WTH can they ever learn with a release that they couldn't learn with a verification? And what are they, ever, going to do with that information versus not having it? The illness was either verified or not. What difference does the release make at that point?
What happens if you have to verify a legitimate illness that is, due to either when you attempted to verify it (condition passed by that time) or it was impossible to diagnose for sure (nausea/upset stomach with no other symptoms) that is therefore unverifiable to a third party?
What happens if you have to verify something that is unverifiable to a third party, and then they ask for a release, and there is nothing different on that release than on the verification?
Then what?
This sick policy is by far the worst part of this TA and opens up a huge can of worms to harrass us and make us fly sick for most if not all borderline conditions. It is worth a NO vote on this issue alone.
06-28-2015, 03:15 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by gloopy
Plus I want to know what use, ever, would they have getting this "medical release" information?
You're never going to have to provide them a medical release until you are well into the threshold where you have to "verify" your illness anyway (almost always at your expense now, another face slapping concession).
So WTH can they ever learn with a release that they couldn't learn with a verification? And what are they, ever, going to do with that information versus not having it? The illness was either verified or not. What difference does the release make at that point?
What happens if you have to verify a legitimate illness that is, due to either when you attempted to verify it (condition passed by that time) or it was impossible to diagnose for sure (nausea/upset stomach with no other symptoms) that is therefore unverifiable to a third party?
What happens if you have to verify something that is unverifiable to a third party, and then they ask for a release, and there is nothing different on that release than on the verification?
Then what?
This sick policy is by far the worst part of this TA and opens up a huge can of worms to harrass us and make us fly sick for most if not all borderline conditions. It is worth a NO vote on this issue alone.
You're never going to have to provide them a medical release until you are well into the threshold where you have to "verify" your illness anyway (almost always at your expense now, another face slapping concession).
So WTH can they ever learn with a release that they couldn't learn with a verification? And what are they, ever, going to do with that information versus not having it? The illness was either verified or not. What difference does the release make at that point?
What happens if you have to verify a legitimate illness that is, due to either when you attempted to verify it (condition passed by that time) or it was impossible to diagnose for sure (nausea/upset stomach with no other symptoms) that is therefore unverifiable to a third party?
What happens if you have to verify something that is unverifiable to a third party, and then they ask for a release, and there is nothing different on that release than on the verification?
Then what?
This sick policy is by far the worst part of this TA and opens up a huge can of worms to harrass us and make us fly sick for most if not all borderline conditions. It is worth a NO vote on this issue alone.
06-28-2015, 03:16 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by BobZ
A patch job? in the middle of a ratification vote?
and I thought it couldn't get any more pathetic.
and I thought it couldn't get any more pathetic.
06-28-2015, 03:17 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Decoupled
Posts: 922
This was just posted by Tom Brielmann at the Delta Pilots Against Contract 2015 TA. I thought it was worth reposting.
"Of the two thousand Pilots in NYC, how many have been identified as sick abusers? Take a wild guess. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The few that were investigated were found not guilty of abuse. The moral argument seed that was planted bears no fruit in C66."
One man's abuser is another man's wrongly accused.
"Of the two thousand Pilots in NYC, how many have been identified as sick abusers? Take a wild guess. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The few that were investigated were found not guilty of abuse. The moral argument seed that was planted bears no fruit in C66."
One man's abuser is another man's wrongly accused.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
