header-logo header-logo

03 June 2010 / Lisa Hatch
Issue: 7420 / Categories: Features , Health & safety , Terms&conditions , Employment
printer mail-detail

Fit for purpose?

Lisa Hatch weighs up the evidential value of the new style sick notes for disability discrimination claims

Most employers and employment lawyers will at some point have come across GP’s sick notes produced by absent employees. However, on 6 April 2010 the old style Med 3 and Med 5 sick notes familiar to many were replaced with a new-style “fit note”. Officially titled a “Statement of Fitness for Work” the new note is now being issued by GPs to patients off sick from work. The new single form will be used for both statutory sick pay and social security claims (see the Social Security (Medical Evidence) and Statutory Sick Pay (Medical Evidence) (Amendment) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/137) and is only issued if the patient is off sick for more than seven days. GPs are required to tick a box on the form to confirm whether the patient is “not fit for work” or “may be fit for work taking account of the following advice”. In a crucial change from the old sick notes,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll