Can Sick Leave Be Used When Casual and Earned Leaves Are Exhausted? Seeking Advice on Leave Policies

Dear All,

I have a small doubt. If an employee's CL and EL are over, and SL is remaining, can he avail the same in place of CL or EL, or can he use it only when he is sick? If he cannot avail the SL, then if he is taking any leave, will it be treated as Loss of Pay (LOP)?

Kindly help with this.

Thanks in advance,
Riji

Dear Riji,

He can avail SL if he does not have CL or EL. If your company insists on a medical certificate for the SL, then the employee has to make arrangements to get a medical certificate for the leave availed by him.

L. Kumar

Dear Riji,

Sick leave (SL) should only be availed if he is actually sick. If you are giving him SL because he has no CL and EL left, I think it's wrong as it defeats the purpose of SL. In such cases, even if you ask for a certificate, they might resort to providing a false medical certificate. I believe you should only grant SL if he is actually sick; otherwise, mark it as leave without pay (LOP).

Regards,
Shilpi

Hi Riji,

Very well defined by our HR friends that one can't avail his available SL if he is not sick. If you allow the same that he may avail leave from his available SL even if he is not sick, otherwise, it would be a breach of HR practice because it's HR people who set the trends for others. We should not allow others to go on the wrong track out of practices.

Regards,
Amit Seth

I am with Amit Seth. Choosing a negative way to avail SL is not a good thing. You should take your SL whenever you are really sick.

Sana

Hi,

I guess we are being a little too stringent with our HR policy. True SL is when you fall sick, but the fact that an employee does not have any CL or PL and needs to be away for any personal reasons, then we need to go ahead and give him leave. Since SL is the only available option, that is the only way to save him from an LOP. LOP must be discouraged as it demotivates the employee, harming the productivity cycle.

Regards,
Resham

Hi Riji and all HR intellectuals.

I do agree with all the replies that it should be discouraged. But as per the rule (if I am wrong, please correct me), if sick leave is availed for more than 3 days, then only a medical certificate is required. Up to three days, it is not required. This is because for just minor issues like fever or cough, the employee need not visit a doctor for medication; they can manage it themselves.

Regards,
Prabhakar Rao.M

Dear Riji,

LOP is applicable if the employee does not have any leave in his credit. Since SL is available, he can avail SL. He need not be really sick, but also have some personal work, he can avail SL by mentioning the concerned superiors. We HR people need to be a little practical in certain cases and cannot apply all rules and regulations for the smooth functioning of the organization.

L. Kumar

I think we shouldn't give LOP if he is so particular about having a leave; then let him have an LOP. Moreover, if we start giving sick leave in case of CL and EL, even though we know that he is not actually sick, then what's the point of keeping SL? We can convert it to CL and EL. I think if an employee runs out of CL and EL and requires leave, let him have an LOP so that there might be a chance of reducing his leaves and getting back to work.

Joey

Let him avail SL but don't make it a precedent. Get a request from him because if you treat it as loss of pay, it will look odd since he has SL in his account.

Regards,
V. Chithranath

Hello Rijji,

I personally believe that if an employee is left with SL, then let the employee avail it because if you don't allow it, the employee will come up with some false statements just to avail the SL. In other words, HR will be encouraging employees to come up with false stories. Moreover, CL, EL, and SL have already been allotted to the employee, and it is budgeted, so there won't be any change in the budget. Let the employee be at ease :)

Regards, Fahd Khan Sherani

An employee who has already exhausted all his EL and CL has obviously got into the habit of going on leave regularly. If you allow him to make false claims and use his SL also, then you are not doing him any favors. On the contrary.

It is true that sometimes employees take a day's or two days' leave claiming they were unwell - fever or other minor ailment - and if HR believes them, and there is no proof to the contrary, then there is nothing that can be done.

But to officially allow employees to utilize their SL for casual work or holidays is ethically incorrect. SL is meant for a specific purpose and should not be misutilized.

To allow employees to so misutilize leave is giving them a wrong signal that anything goes. This will only lead them to cheat the company in other ways also.

This would also send a wrong message to employees who are ethical, that such unethical practices are not only allowed, they are encouraged.

It would be better to treat such absence as 'leave without pay'. If the employee is still determined to go on leave, then he has to bear the consequences.

Jeroo

Hello Jeroo,

I agree with you, but please try to be more practical because the real world with real people is very different 😉

Regards, Fahd Khan Sherani

Hello Amit Sir,

I fully agree with you. Sometimes, we allow SL against personal leave during a 0 balance of CL/EL. It makes employees happy, and nobody can say that they were sick or are not conveying a false message of sickness. It is very clear to all our staff that this kind of leave can be adjusted only after mutual understanding; it's not their right to claim every time.

Amit sir, could you please confirm if we are doing the right thing or if it is wrong?

Regards, Rahul Tiwari

Hi All,

I have gone through all comments. But I support Resham, because an employee should not be treated as a machine. He has some family obligations as well. We cannot mark him absent only because he has left with no proper leave balance. However, we cannot, of course, encourage this kind of relaxation in every case.

Regards,
Subh

Ethically, sick leaves are for sickness only. However, in many companies, sick leave is allowed on the basis of a medical certificate if the absence is for more than three days. In our company, sick leave is cumulative so that employees can avail the same in case of any serious diseases/illness. The logic of sick leave in lieu of casual leave or earned leave is not acceptable. You may consider sick leave, but please don't put forward the logic of in lieu of casual leave or earned leave.

Regards,
NKT

If it is defined in the HR manual/standing order that a medical certificate is necessary for availing sick leave, then it is okay. Otherwise, you cannot mark him as Leave Without Pay (LOP).

Neeraj

Dear Riji,

When any leave is available in an employee's credit, you cannot deduct LOP, and the employee should be allowed to avail of his SL.

Regards,

L. Kumar

SL, EL, CL...

EL - It is Earned Leave. You can take this leave for any occasions or personal reasons (It may be 12, 15, 21, or 30 - depending on the company, the number of leaves will differ).

CL - Casual Leave - same as EL, but it may be 7 or 8.

SL - Sick Leave - it should be taken when an employee is sick (it may be 8). Also, he/she has to produce a Doctor's Certificate. EL and SL can accumulate up to 2 years.

In any case, we cannot give SL instead of EL/CL.

Best Regards,
Shanmugam Thilakk
Mb 0936 44 22880
Email: thilak.ts@gmail.com

Dear Friend,

The job that we do includes a major responsibility of keeping an employee's life at ease and not making it difficult. Hence, the best thing is to be flexible in such matters, take it case by case, and not roll out a policy stating that one can be taken in place of the other. At my company, I allow people to take CL's when SL's are over and vice versa. I move on to PL/EL only after the SL/CL are over. LOP is the last thing I would do. I am open to contrary views.

NSK.

Hi Riji!

The employee has exhausted his/her CL and EL balance. That means either he or she is a new employee and, due to prorated basis, the leave balance was low, or that he/she spent it for marriage (self, of course) purpose.

I request you to be case-specific. If the employee is new, you should not allow utilizing SL against your policy. If he is an old employee and has availed leave for self-marriage (and honeymoon :)), you should give some consideration.

Whatever you do, please be consistent with all your employees. Someone has advised to grant SL and not making it precedence. But let me make it very clear that precedences start with one instance only.

Regards,
Hiten

Hi, this is Mandar Jagannath,

I am diverting a bit from this topic, but guys, tell me one thing: can SL and PL be carried over for the next year, or can those be encashed if not availed? Is it a statutory requirement by the government, or does it depend from company to company? Please help me out.

Regards,
Mandar Jagannath

I agree with everyone, but we should not be so stringent. It would create a sort of dissatisfaction among them because we are providing leaves so that they won't get demotivated, and we should also respect them. If they do have accumulated hours, we can adjust them because at the end of the day, we want them to have a feel as they are also part of the organization.

And last but not least, I think HR is like a bridge between the employees and the management, and also employees are not for HR but HR is for employees. - Neha :)

Hi Neha!

Dissatisfaction will arise only if we treat different individuals or cases differently. We have to be consistent with our policy and standards. - Hiten

Hi Hiten,

This is what I want to say. I agree with you. We don't have to be rigid. We should be flexible enough.

-Neha 😀

I think sanctioning sick leave must be part of the internal policy of the company. Based on the genuine reason and history of the nature of the leave taken, the person must be sanctioned sick leave as a special case, irrespective of following generic leave rules when other category leaves are exhausted.

Dear Riji,

You have not mentioned the organization. The rules are clear as far as Government is concerned. Regarding the private organization, based on my experience, I could tell you the following:

1. Leave is not a matter of right for an employee even if he possesses adequate leave to his credit.

2. Sick Leave, itself is clear that an employee could avail sick leave only when he is sick.

3. Just because he has no CL or EL at credit, he is not eligible to avail Sick Leave.

4. However, based on the performance, relationship, need with administration/management may permit the official to proceed on sick leave.

5. The sick leave should be certified by a doctor.

6. Even in case an official proceeds on sick leave while he has adequate leave such as CL or EL at his credit, the administration has no right to intervene on the kind of leave the official is availing since the selection of the kind of leave is the right of the official.

7. The administration may reject the grant of leave for reasons best known to them only.

8. In case the administration feels that the official is availing sick leave based on a false or bogus medical certificate, the administration before the expiry of such sick leave may direct the official to proceed to a doctor who is working in the capacity of a civil surgeon or Assistant Civil Surgeon in any Government Hospital for a second medical opinion.

As such, the grant of leave is within the powers of the Administration and has nothing to do with the leave at the credit of the official.

Sengailingam

No, he can take SL if he has no other balance of leave available. For this, a medical certificate is to be provided by the employee.

Dear Riji,

When an employee has any leave in his credit, you cannot deduct LOP from the employee. Also, please consider that if an employee does not have CL and only has SL, then allow him to avail SL in place of CL and vice versa.

This is what we do, and such minor adjustments will certainly keep the employee happy and ensure that he does not exhaust all his leave again. This is because in some companies, there must be a minimum number of EL to be taken while availing (say a minimum of 5 days); an employee who wants to avail one or two days cannot avail EL.

Hope you will understand this.

With regards, L. Kumar

Greetings,

In our organization, if all leave is exhausted, then one can avail of sick leave, but a medical certificate is required.

Hi Riji,

You cannot deduct LOP when he has leave in his credit. Leave qoutas are given so that employees are not treated as machines and gets time to attend his personal issues so that they do not carry it to work. Your company has credited EL,PL and SL to employees, now its upon them for which reason they are availing which of the leaves. You can regulate the leaves taken by them but not whether they take SL when they are not sick or CL when they are sick. If the management has given him consent to take leave on a particular day, how does it matter if he avails it under SL, PL or EL. If he has exhausted all the leave quotas, then of course you can deduct LOP, which even the person taking leave is aware of and is ready to bear.

You cannot ask him to submit medical certificate for one day's leave. People may not be able to work when they have cough, cold, headache etc.. but surely they need not always go to doctor for this minor ailment. Asking for medical certificate for one day's sickness would only encourage fake certificates. But if by any chance, it is clearly mentioned in the company policy that medical certificate is necessary for one day's SL also, then the case is different.

I read few comments that giving SL when an employee is not actually sick, would encourage wrong practices. But just think practically, are you sure that all the employees who had taken SL before were actually sick. This guy tells you that he was not sick, so you deduct his LOP when he has his SL quota pending. Those who lied they were sick, got SL approved and you would deduct LOP for one who is honest? Wouldn't this encourage employees to lie and avail SL? Wouldn't this guy lie next time that he is not well and avail his pending SL quota? Wouldn't this end up into a situation where in employees are dissatisfied and grumble against company and at the same time company will have to avail their SL?

Regards

seena