Potential Termination-Should I leave on disability?

[pittguy578]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

I have been with the same company, a larger insurer, for nearly 9 years. My performance was stellar up until the last 8 months. I had been working long hours and a lot of overtime. I had actually worked more overtime during the preceding year than anyone else in the state. That was confirmed with my HR representative. My performance began to decline as I was suffering from depression and burnout. My concentration was completely shot. My doctor had been advising me to take a leave of absence, and I was hesitant to do that. I am a proud individual, and thought I could work through it. I ended up having to take a leave of absence when my symptoms became acute and really didn't have a choice. I had started to make mistakes I would never normally make. I had spoken with my manager a number of times before I actually had to go out to see if accommodations could be made-the workload was unmanageable by any standards. No one could keep up. I was receiving nearly 2 and a half times the normal. They fell on deaf ears.

While I was out my performance was reviewed. Obviously the results were not good due to my mental state. I was clinically disabled. My doctor recommended that I not go back at all and advised me to go on long term disability ( I had been on short term disability). I wanted to give going back to work one more shot just to see if I could do it. It was against his wishes, but he did sign for me to go back to work.

Due to my performance issues because I was ill, I was put on a performance improvement plan before I had to take my leave.,

While I was out, I sent a detailed rebuttal to my manager re some of the issues on the cases I handled. She said she could not address them due to the fact I was out on disability. When I came back, I wanted to have those issues addressed as I disagreed with some of her comments and do not feel they were being fairly reviewed. Putting it this way. The files were adequate in terms of our formal company standards-we have a formal document outlining our process and standards. She was reviewing the files to a different standard despite the fact other managers higher than her had told us to do things differently. When I came back, I wanted to have those issues formally redressed/discussed, but I was told it was old news and they weren't going to go back. I felt like I was being railroaded as we always have the ability to redress issues within the company, especially if you do not agree with a decision.

Basically what it boils down to is I have come back to work. I was put on a final performance improvement plan to bring up my standards. I am still not well, and my doctor still does not think I should be working. I am definitely concerned about losing my job. Would there be any benefit to me essentially taking myself out of the company by leaving and going on long-term disability or should I just wait to get fired if that is going to be the case..or does it really matter? My long term disability insurance would not terminate if I got fired. It would still be covered under Cobra. I am just not sure what to do if there is a good decision.

 

[sandyclaus]

So, you (voluntarily) worked long hours with a lot of overtime and got burned out. I'm sure that the bump in your pay made some difference in your ability to maintain that kind of work pace. You could always have slowed your pace, taken some time off, or at least not worked all those hours, and you probably could have relieved a lot of the physical symptoms you describe. Even your doctor agreed that you were fine to come back to work after the break you did take.

Now you are about to be fired, and you are trying to figure out some way to claim disability in order to stop the monetary gravy train that has continued, which will stop once you lose your job. Perfectly understandable, but I don't think it would be a credible claim based on what you have stated.

Just my opinion, but hopefully someone else might chime in on this for you as well to give you a little more perspective.

 

[pittguy578]

Actually the overtime was technically voluntary, but it was essentially mandatory if you wanted to keep up and not get buried and get behind...and if you get behind in claims, it is failing. It was not as if you could work the 8 hours and keep up the standards that were required. Everyone is compared to their peers within the company, and if you were not putting in the time, then you were going to be on the "list" . We were getting a workload which was literally 2x the standard for the position. We were supposed to be getting 120 cases a month. I received a company record of 250 claims in a month. I had spoken to my managers about the workload, and they said there was nothing they could do..so basically I was forced to work to keep up.

My doctor and my licensed therapist did not agree with me going back to work, but I told him I wanted to give it a shot. He advised me to leave out and call him right away if my symptoms did not abate and no longer could do the job. My medical history would support long term disability, and even the people from the disability company were preparing for a long term claim. I wanted to give it one last shot to see if I could do it. Obviously I cannot. My performance was stellar for nine years, and suddenly I am not able to do the job. There is definitely a medical cause for this.

 

[Ozark_Sophist]

My advice is go on disability. I've been there and done that (like your situation, up to 84 hour work weeks). Life is too important.
Protect your professional reputation.

 

[Betty]

If you're not well & the job is taking a toll on you & if you qualify for LTD, you might consider going out on disability.

Did you qualify for FMLA? If so, did you use it up when out on STD?

 

[pittguy578]

Thank for your responses. I think that is the route I am going to go.

This is anothe separate, but related issue. There is a concern about the way the performance review was done initially.

When someone is having their performance reviewed, managers are required to give real time feedback to their employees so that areas could be improved in real time and no further mistakes in those areas were made.
There were a few areas which would have been fixed right away if my previous manager had simply took me back to her desk or sent me an e-mail saying this is the way you need to do it. However, that is not the way it was done. Essentially she had let me do the things I was doing with no feedback whatsoever until everything was compiled, and by then it was too late. am not someone that would have taken the manager's comments lightly or blown them off. I was really in shock that she had no advised me to make any changes until it was too late.

When I first came back to work, I had made it clear I wanted to have those issues addressed and wanted to explain my actions and have a chance to rebut some of those areas which I do not believe were fairly recorded. They initially said they would grant it, and then later they said it doesn't really matter and it was water under the bridge. I really could not believe they blew that off as employees always have a chance to speak with their managers re concerns on files. My manager had been moved to another department by the time I got back, but that is still not really an excuse for not addressing the issue.

#1 I do not believe the previous manager handled the management aspect of her job correctly in terms of not providing me immediate feedback so I could make some minor changes to perform my improvement. They were not major issues in terms of the claim handling process. They were actually minor documentation issues and things such as not getting recorded statements on every file. We had been told by managers above my manager that recorded statements were not necessary on every file..and that is one of the things I was dinged for in my review which I do not believe is fair.



#2. I had sent multiple e-mails to managers while I was out, and I wanted a chance to rebut those specific issues I had on the peformance review. They said they would address them when I came back, and they told me that for the first week. Then they advised me that essentially it was water under the bridge.


There is formal employee arbitration/grievance process in this company.
Should I go ahead and address that with the HR representative? Or anything else I should do to cover myself?

 

[cbg]

There are no laws dictating how performance reviews must be handled. This is entirely an internal matter.

 

[pittguy578]

There are no laws dictating how performance reviews must be handled. This is entirely an internal matter.

I know there are no legal issues per se, but it is an insurance company and they go by the book in terms of personnel issues. I had advised them of my medical condition during the last month before I had to go out-that I was no longer able to do the demands of the job and they did not do anything. I was hoping for some kind of respite yet things got worse, and my performance that month was what prompted my warning.

I guess the above is neither here nor there at that point, but in terms of any kind of avenues-they do have an employee grievance procedure in there handbook. An arbitrator would hear the claim, and they would need to explain why they deviated from their standard procedures in terms of not providing feedback...and why they had told me initially they would re review those issues I had with the peformance review and then brushing it aside and acting as if nothing was wrong which I find to be ridiculous.

It is one thing to not give an employee a chance to rebut something minor, but to not allow an employee the chance to rebut something like a final performance warning is something that goes against their policy and good practices.