Dear All,
I heard from a friend that a prolonged and uninterrupted sick leave above 2 months during an actual employment (e.g. burnout), may complicate the life in getting hired by new employers in the future, mainly due to issues in receiving the coverage from their pension insurance. Have you heard anything similar too? Also not sure if these "2 months" of continuous sick leave are the correct time limit commonly measured by Swiss pension insurances or if other criteria are used too. Please highlight any other relevant implication you are aware of.
I could not find anything precise on this on the net or other threads so many thanks for you valuable inputs!
Cheers!
If you were off sick during your employment, how would future employers know about it? It wouldn't show up in your reference, and your medical history is private. Unless you disclose it yourself, they wouldn't know.
Dear ShirleyNot and all,
Many thanks for your rapid reply. I heard that new employer pension fund may ask the candidate/newcomer to fulfill a form and declare, among other things, your if he/she has been sick for more than 2 months consecutively in the last x years, if so to provide further details, and this may create some issues.
Furthermore I also heard that long sick periods could be mentioned in the reference letter by previous employer.
Thanks a lot for your additions.
Cheers!
To put it bluntly, your friend has not got a clue what they are talking about!
First of all your medical records are private and won't be disclosed to anyone unless you authorise it. So a future employer will not be aware of any medical leave you have taken in with a previous employer.
Concerning pension funds, there is no medical examination to join your employers pension fund, there has not been for about thirty years.
Some companies do expect a medical when you join and you fill in a medical form. HR knows your full history as a result, but your boss knows nothing unless you tell them. That could be where the confusion comes in. I‘ve actually experienced this and been told there were employees with all sorts of illnesses. It can actually be in your favor.
Not for mandatory BVG but it could very well happen for the non-mandatory part. This is sent to the pension fund though - not shared with the employer.
Could also be for life insurance if the company offers it above what is offered via pension plan and especially for higher salar amounts
Through the grapevine, potentially.
However that will not impact your employability at all. If your medical record exposes significant risks you'll be conditionally accepted to the new pension plan, your risk/insurance coverage will be limited for x first years. If nothing happens during the time you'll earn full coverage.
Which companies are you actually referring to? In 35 years here I have never come across HR having access to your records. The company doctor, life insurance company and pension fund but not HR.
Could be a pilot perhaps?
I have come across the situation that during a reference check call, the person asked straight out "was the employee sick often and/or did they take extended leave" the person answering refused to answer such a question. But even then, potentially you would loose the job but not get your pension benefits affected.
What's with all the extended sick leave posts here lately?
Many thanks everyone for the answers!
I now understand that there's a limited risk on future employability as HR may not get the information but it's more a risk on pension plan (conditional acceptance + risk/insurance coverage to be limited for x first years).
Regarding the mention of prolonged sick leave history on final reference letter, I heard the employer has the right to do so, and this would not be good. Any further comment here?
Thanks again and have a wonderful day.
Depends if you're recovered or not. Maybe if you have recurring bouts and are likely to be off without much warning for weeks at a time, it might be worth mentioning but, either way, most people are given the opportunity to see their reference and discuss elements with HR / employer before it's finalised.
Reading between the lines of your posts, it would probably be recommended that you speak with your current employer if you're likely to be off sick before it gets to the stage where you are battling over references, pensions, etc.
^This. I know people who have had to do medical exams, but only the doctor keeps the record. The doctor issues a general report to the pension fund about whether or not the employee is healthy enough to continue working. It helps the pension fund insurance figure out costs based on risk. Or something like that.
To put it bluntly, you don’t know what you’re talking about!
I had to undergo a medical before I was able to join my company’s pension scheme in 2009. One of the largest pension funds in the country and I don’t believe I was a special case. The doctor did confirm, however, that the details of the examination would not be shared with the company.
How about trying to be less know it all and bellicose with every answer you give?
Just a question - how would a medical, which checks your health at one point in time, show that one had taken extended leave from previous employment due to burn out?
In the same way that they find out if you have taken recreational drugs or have had mental health issues in the past... by asking you. How you choose to reply is of course a different matter.
When I first came to Switzerland, in my first job, they did it. It gets a bit grey when you list those, because if they are truly isolated entities is questionable. But yes I accept they shouldn't share information. i.e. Do the records from the company doctor get stored in the same place as HR????