It goes without saying that tuberculosis is a terrible disease (as most diseases are, from the patients' point of view). The government and civic bodies give none month's leave to their employees suffering from tuberculosis. No substitute employee is provided to do the work of these employees on leave. It either taxes the healthy employees who keep working, or the work is compromised. As doctors, we compensate for the absence of all doctors away from work, because patients' health is our primary job, and it cannot be deferred. But we expect that those on such sick leave should not abuse the system and their coworkers while they get well.
We had one lecturer who developed tuberculosis of lymph nodes. She started therapy and went on tuberculosis leave. She had no functional disability. In fact, she looked the picture of health while her overworked colleagues looked sick. However she remained on leave for the duration of therapy. "I got the disease in the hospital. Now the hospital has to give me leave, as a part of compensation." Her argument was flawed. She could have got the disease anywhere, not necessarily in the hospital. Furthermore, she must have got it long before she joined the hospital, considering the latent period and the duration of her service. Anyway, I did not argue the point, because she was sick. After joining, she asked for three more months of leave, citing ill health of some not very close relative, whom she wanted to nurse. 'She must be practicing privately' people said 'and this must be an excuse to get time for it while retaining the security of a permanent job to which she can return should the attempt at private practice fail.' This leave was not sanctioned by the administration She resigned, without compensating for the efforts of her colleagues who had done her work in her absence.
We had one senior staff member, who developed tuberculosis and went on leave for nine months, in one month increments. Modern therapy of tuberculosis is shorter, but the leave is still up to nine months. Ill health was cited as the reason for extension of the leave every month. This person put up an application for special leave to go to a foreign country for a conference while on tuberculosis leave. It was rejected by administration as per rules. Then this person put up an application for sick leave for going to the conference. It was even stated that change of atmosphere would help recovery from tuberculosis (even if the duration was less than a week). I am not aware of what happened, because this person has not joined duty from ongoing sick leave yet and we are not in communication. But what troubles me is that a person is too sick to work, but not for going to conferences, while colleagues are overworked.
The system permits such abuse and conscience is overcome by need for self satisfaction. As a result such occurrences will continue. It reminds me of a story of a Lecturer who was taking sick leave for one month at a time, for 'speedy recovery' from prolapsed intervertebral disc. After three months of leave were over, she applied for fourth month of leave. The day after she sent in this application, she was seen running around the Shirdi, a holy place for devotees of Saibaba. When she saw the Lecturer who saw her in pink of health, she ran away at a speed that would not be possible for any patient of a painful disease of the spine. The matter was duly reported to the administration. I heard an inquiry was initiated, but am not aware of the result of the same.
We had one lecturer who developed tuberculosis of lymph nodes. She started therapy and went on tuberculosis leave. She had no functional disability. In fact, she looked the picture of health while her overworked colleagues looked sick. However she remained on leave for the duration of therapy. "I got the disease in the hospital. Now the hospital has to give me leave, as a part of compensation." Her argument was flawed. She could have got the disease anywhere, not necessarily in the hospital. Furthermore, she must have got it long before she joined the hospital, considering the latent period and the duration of her service. Anyway, I did not argue the point, because she was sick. After joining, she asked for three more months of leave, citing ill health of some not very close relative, whom she wanted to nurse. 'She must be practicing privately' people said 'and this must be an excuse to get time for it while retaining the security of a permanent job to which she can return should the attempt at private practice fail.' This leave was not sanctioned by the administration She resigned, without compensating for the efforts of her colleagues who had done her work in her absence.
We had one senior staff member, who developed tuberculosis and went on leave for nine months, in one month increments. Modern therapy of tuberculosis is shorter, but the leave is still up to nine months. Ill health was cited as the reason for extension of the leave every month. This person put up an application for special leave to go to a foreign country for a conference while on tuberculosis leave. It was rejected by administration as per rules. Then this person put up an application for sick leave for going to the conference. It was even stated that change of atmosphere would help recovery from tuberculosis (even if the duration was less than a week). I am not aware of what happened, because this person has not joined duty from ongoing sick leave yet and we are not in communication. But what troubles me is that a person is too sick to work, but not for going to conferences, while colleagues are overworked.
The system permits such abuse and conscience is overcome by need for self satisfaction. As a result such occurrences will continue. It reminds me of a story of a Lecturer who was taking sick leave for one month at a time, for 'speedy recovery' from prolapsed intervertebral disc. After three months of leave were over, she applied for fourth month of leave. The day after she sent in this application, she was seen running around the Shirdi, a holy place for devotees of Saibaba. When she saw the Lecturer who saw her in pink of health, she ran away at a speed that would not be possible for any patient of a painful disease of the spine. The matter was duly reported to the administration. I heard an inquiry was initiated, but am not aware of the result of the same.
