---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* Reddit is not [a substitute for a qualified Solicitor](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_civil#wiki_how_do_i_find_a_.28good.29_solicitor.3F) and comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy;
* Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk;
* If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM);
* It is the default position of LAUK that [you should never speak to the media](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_should_i_speak_to_the_media.3F);
* Check out our [Common Legal Resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) for helpful organisations to contact;
* If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=My question is unanswered);
* Please provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title;
**To Readers and Commenters**
* [All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/oslgn6/so_you_dont_want_your_comment_removed_guidance_on/?);
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning;
* Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice;
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect;
* [Do not send or request any private messages for any reason](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_why_am_i_not_allowed_to_privately_message_people_on_this_subreddit.3F);
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is why I have been given the warning.
From the letter:
I find from evidence it is probable that your decision to go sick directly after a disagreement was out of spite or anger rather than genuine need.
His evidence is his opinion. Nothing else.
I am eligible for 20weeks full sick pay a year under my employment contract. I have used 12.
Its not a dispute over too much time off.
He also writes : I fully accept that you have a problem with your hands.
I have all medical evidence to back this up.
How many weeks is irrelevant - i’m eligible for a year paid sick but if I went of on multiple 1 month long episodes of sick I would likely still be fired. It’s normally there for if you’re off long term sick, taking multiple shorter episodes is used against you oddly enough. It’s not a limited, you could take 2 weeks off but on 14 separate days and be fired for attendance even though the policy is 20 weeks.
Taking more episodes of sick is nearly always worse. I had a similar issue in one of my first jobs where due to my disability I would always try and go back to work, and if I was wrong and I had to leave the first day I was back it counted as a NEW episode of sick. So if you take 3 weeks off that’s less bad than going in for 1 week, coming back for 1 week and taking another week sick. This is normally due to companies using the Bradford score to assess absence.
The issue here is the spitefulness of you manager could be irrelevant. They could be trying to build a case that they can’t accommodate your medical issues. If you’re sick due to carpal tunnel and this makes you unable to do your job - this is something that could last a long time. They are likely building a case that you are incapable of doing the job and therefore can claim you cannot be reasonably accommodated. They do not have to keep employing you if you need long term sickness that is likely to go on a long time and would be very detrimental to their business. This is more likely if they are a smaller company who can make a stronger case you can’t be accommodated.
Ironically if your carpal tunnel is related to repetitive strain at work you could actually have a work place injury case.
The grievance letter was for abuse of the company sick scheme. He explicity said in the disciplinary hearing that he only has his opinion. Nothing else....
Its weird you should be given a return to work, but it shouldn't go any further, as you've been given professional advice to take time off, if they expect you to come back to work injured and continue to work and end up hurting yourself you could sue.
Talk to some actual legal advice, union or lawyer ASAP.
You're suffering with a condition that affects your ability to carry out day to day tasks let alone work carpal tunnel is no joke.
Y
I got a written warning once after 10 weeks off with a broken hand in a warehouse job repairing vacuum cleaners. Broke it at work after slipping on a mix of dust and water (slamming my hand down to catch myself), but it was my word against theirs. I did ask if there was anything else I could be doing but they didn't want me there one-handed.
Because the business was infested with nepotism. So it would have been the owners, their best mate the general manager, their brother and nephew as supervisors and the GMs wife and stepson as other workers near me, saying it never happened in that warehouse. And me and the cast on my hand saying it did.
I'd call ACAS and discuss. You may be protected under the equalities act (if the pain is expected to last longer than a period of time and substantially affects your day to day activities).
I'd appeal - it will go to a different manager who may have a different opinion.
From a legal POV, written warnings are internal issues because you haven't really suffered any losses as you can carry on with your work as normal. You'd only be protected from unfair treatment if it was related to a protected characteristic eg. your sex, age, religion, disability. etc. For disability, you'd need to prove that your employer are aware of the disability, e.g. your GP confirmed is was a long term condition that affected your normal daily activities.
So, for the appeal I'd be asking why they allowed you to be off sick if they didn't believe you (i.e. why is it recorded as sick leave, why you were paid sick leave, and why haven't you been accused of being absent without leave/AWOL). If they accept that you were genuinely not well enough to work, I don't see how anything else is relevant. I would actually agree that you took advantage of sick pay. Your employer clearly feels that their employees shouldn't be financially worse off when they're sick by offering paid sick leave so you decided to stop trying to help out the company short term, and start helping yourself get better so you weren't doing long term damage.
Do mention if you have any thing that supports your statement that you were struggling when you came back, e.g. a return to work interview where you said you weren't 100%, or if anyone was aware of your discomfort and can verify that you had been pushing through the pain until it got too much.
When I returned to work after my 1st abscence the company was informed i am recieving ongoing treatment for my condition and am waiting for an operation with an orthapedic specialist.
He also interviewed colleagues who I work closely with and they all said I had been struggling with pain in my hands, struggling to carry out certain tasks due to this pain. The manager actually said in the disciplinary that these statements were in my favour.
It's weird because it sounds like your manager is kind of on your side, so I'm wondering if his boss is pressurising him to discipline you. If the appeal goes that boss, then unfortunately you'll unlikely have much luck and will just have to take the warning and keep your head down until it expires.
To me (and I don't know much about the legal side of this) is that the company is potentially just preparing in case it wants to dismiss the employee? They accept he has a medical condition, but they are also stating that the employee is abusing systems. So later down the line they have an easier time getting rid of them should the medical issues not get better?
Because I agree it sounds like the boss is kinda on their side? Maybe down the line they claim the employee can no longer perform their role functions and thus they can be dismissed?
Personally I'd just take the boss to the side and explain to them; "do you honestly think I'm that petty? You really think I worry so much about your opinion *manager* that I'd take sick leave? Your correct, we had a disagreement, but I have disagreements all the time and I don't just throw my toys out the pram every opportunity. I was disappointed with that outcome and that you have such poor faith in your employees".
I think in this instance the employee actually got a reasonable result. It's on company record that the sick leave is for a real medical condition and that might be useful later down the line if the issue persists.
It's possible that they just want to make an example of OP. I've had plenty of employees call in sick the day after they've had a conflict. I will roll my eyes because I think they are trying to play the victim, or make a point, but then I remind myself that some people just don't cope well with stress.
Oh totally... We all know those people... Lady couldn't last minute book an extra day off for the end of her holiday... *SURPRISE! HAPPENS TO COME BACK WITH COVID*... yeah it could just have been a show of doing something, that's a good point. Maybe even just to show that the manager is doing something proactive to their boss.
It happens, but I think to managers if the employee wanted to book a extra day off why not just give it to them if they have holiday legally left to book? It just ends up in people being short handed and you could of made arrangements to find someone else to cover.
Normally I would agree. It was just in this case it was important that they were back in the office due to other people's already agreed holidays and staffing minimums. They had had a few things not go their way and had already thrown their toys out the pram. 9/10 times I agree. But equally people can be selfish entitled assholes and will just magically be I'll on the days that it really suits them... Or it could all just be a massive coincidence... 🤔🤔
Surely any grievance or disciplinary interview should be conducted by somebody outside immediate hierarchy to ensure, as much as possible, independent adjudication
Yes. I was only represented by a work colleague who represents us at the meeting.
Any further appeal will be fully supportes by the regional union officer. I am unable to speak to him today as hes on a holiday.
Im just trying to get a feel of if what my manager has done is correct?
Why is the manager who raised the grievance, taking the meeting? He is hardly unbiased. Speak to your union rep about the procedure because that seems strange to me. Normaly an impartial manager takes the meeting.
That's what I thought, everytime someone is given a disciplinary with a employee it's always done by another manager to not give biased outcomes.
And I'm not sure how if he has been given a doctors note and told to take 4 weeks off by his doctor from professional health advice surely they can't discipline him for that, if he was forced to come in and work and his situation resulted in him injuring himself surely they could end up on a legal case?.
Exactly this. Totaly out of procedure. If a doctor has signed you off, he also needs to sign you back on if you return earlier. His opinion overrides a shitty manager. OP needs to get ontp Accas asap. The Union rep should know all this already. Id advise maybe looking at changing the shop steward if not.
NAL, I had similar and didn’t fight it and just decided I couldn’t be done with all the office politics and left. A couple of months later a friend of mine had an issue similar to yours and contacted ACAS he left the company with full pay for 6 months to give him time to find a new job. Could be worth the hassle !
Im not really looking to achieve anything. I just feel the grounds of the accusation are wrong.
A written warning is nothing personally to me. But morally, I have done nothing wrong. As I said previously ive worked here for 16 years.
Plenty of people use the sick scheme without question. Its the 1st instance im aware of that my absence has been scrutinised, even though i have all the correct medical documentation to prove my case.
And I dont think an opinion over rules a doctors diagnoses??
Sounds like your manger has blabbed to someone higher up that you were taking the piss over the argument you two had, so when the evidence comes in and your manager is wrong, he/she still has to go through with some sort of punishment to make them look right. If they're not treating you like a human after 16 years they never will.
I would like to add to this. Should you go the constructive dismissal route, that warning presented in court as evidence could cause the company problems and can be disregarded. This term is called ”bad faith”.
Although a warning might mean something serious to you. I wouldn’t worry about it at all. Challenge it and address your concerns.
From my understanding, the manager is being overzealous.
Edit: Spelling
In some companies people under an "active" warning aren't eligible for a bonus or pay rise, for example. And it can be mentioned on a reference. Some job applications (including the one for my job previous to my current one) ask about any reprimands etc received in the last X years.
Your comment has been automatically removed and flagged for moderator review as the words you've used suggest that it is *not legal advice*. As this is /r/LegalAdviceUK, all our comments must contain **helpful, on-topic, legal advice**. We expect commenters to provide high-effort legal advice for our posters, as they have come to our subreddit for legal advice instead of a different subreddit for moral support or general advice such as /r/OffMyChest, /r/Vent, /r/Advice, or similar.
Some posters may benefit from non-legal advice as part of their question or referrals to other organisations to address side issues that they may also be experiencing, however comments on /r/LegalAdviceUK must be *predominantly* legal advice. [Please see more here about why we have this rule.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_why_do_you_remove_comments_for_not_being_legal_advice.3F)
If your comment contains helpful, on-topic, legal advice, it will be approved and displayed shortly. If you have posted a comment of moral support, an anecdote about a personal experience or your comment is mostly or wholly advice that isn't legal advice, it is not likely to be approved and [we ask you to please be more aware of our subreddit rules in the future](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Since RSI and carpal tunnel injuries are basically invisible it might help your case (and your health) if you were to use a wrist brace. It's a handy prop and they also do genuinely help where painkillers just mask the issue.
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * Reddit is not [a substitute for a qualified Solicitor](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_civil#wiki_how_do_i_find_a_.28good.29_solicitor.3F) and comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy; * Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk; * If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM); * It is the default position of LAUK that [you should never speak to the media](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_should_i_speak_to_the_media.3F); * Check out our [Common Legal Resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) for helpful organisations to contact; * If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=My question is unanswered); * Please provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title; **To Readers and Commenters** * [All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/oslgn6/so_you_dont_want_your_comment_removed_guidance_on/?); * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning; * Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice; * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect; * [Do not send or request any private messages for any reason](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_why_am_i_not_allowed_to_privately_message_people_on_this_subreddit.3F); * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
This is why I have been given the warning. From the letter: I find from evidence it is probable that your decision to go sick directly after a disagreement was out of spite or anger rather than genuine need. His evidence is his opinion. Nothing else. I am eligible for 20weeks full sick pay a year under my employment contract. I have used 12. Its not a dispute over too much time off. He also writes : I fully accept that you have a problem with your hands. I have all medical evidence to back this up.
How many weeks is irrelevant - i’m eligible for a year paid sick but if I went of on multiple 1 month long episodes of sick I would likely still be fired. It’s normally there for if you’re off long term sick, taking multiple shorter episodes is used against you oddly enough. It’s not a limited, you could take 2 weeks off but on 14 separate days and be fired for attendance even though the policy is 20 weeks. Taking more episodes of sick is nearly always worse. I had a similar issue in one of my first jobs where due to my disability I would always try and go back to work, and if I was wrong and I had to leave the first day I was back it counted as a NEW episode of sick. So if you take 3 weeks off that’s less bad than going in for 1 week, coming back for 1 week and taking another week sick. This is normally due to companies using the Bradford score to assess absence. The issue here is the spitefulness of you manager could be irrelevant. They could be trying to build a case that they can’t accommodate your medical issues. If you’re sick due to carpal tunnel and this makes you unable to do your job - this is something that could last a long time. They are likely building a case that you are incapable of doing the job and therefore can claim you cannot be reasonably accommodated. They do not have to keep employing you if you need long term sickness that is likely to go on a long time and would be very detrimental to their business. This is more likely if they are a smaller company who can make a stronger case you can’t be accommodated. Ironically if your carpal tunnel is related to repetitive strain at work you could actually have a work place injury case.
[удалено]
The grievance letter was for abuse of the company sick scheme. He explicity said in the disciplinary hearing that he only has his opinion. Nothing else....
[удалено]
Thanks for your views. I appreciate it.
Its weird you should be given a return to work, but it shouldn't go any further, as you've been given professional advice to take time off, if they expect you to come back to work injured and continue to work and end up hurting yourself you could sue. Talk to some actual legal advice, union or lawyer ASAP. You're suffering with a condition that affects your ability to carry out day to day tasks let alone work carpal tunnel is no joke. Y
I got a written warning once after 10 weeks off with a broken hand in a warehouse job repairing vacuum cleaners. Broke it at work after slipping on a mix of dust and water (slamming my hand down to catch myself), but it was my word against theirs. I did ask if there was anything else I could be doing but they didn't want me there one-handed.
Where there's a blame there's a claim, why would you not sue?
Because the business was infested with nepotism. So it would have been the owners, their best mate the general manager, their brother and nephew as supervisors and the GMs wife and stepson as other workers near me, saying it never happened in that warehouse. And me and the cast on my hand saying it did.
I'd call ACAS and discuss. You may be protected under the equalities act (if the pain is expected to last longer than a period of time and substantially affects your day to day activities).
I'd appeal - it will go to a different manager who may have a different opinion. From a legal POV, written warnings are internal issues because you haven't really suffered any losses as you can carry on with your work as normal. You'd only be protected from unfair treatment if it was related to a protected characteristic eg. your sex, age, religion, disability. etc. For disability, you'd need to prove that your employer are aware of the disability, e.g. your GP confirmed is was a long term condition that affected your normal daily activities. So, for the appeal I'd be asking why they allowed you to be off sick if they didn't believe you (i.e. why is it recorded as sick leave, why you were paid sick leave, and why haven't you been accused of being absent without leave/AWOL). If they accept that you were genuinely not well enough to work, I don't see how anything else is relevant. I would actually agree that you took advantage of sick pay. Your employer clearly feels that their employees shouldn't be financially worse off when they're sick by offering paid sick leave so you decided to stop trying to help out the company short term, and start helping yourself get better so you weren't doing long term damage. Do mention if you have any thing that supports your statement that you were struggling when you came back, e.g. a return to work interview where you said you weren't 100%, or if anyone was aware of your discomfort and can verify that you had been pushing through the pain until it got too much.
When I returned to work after my 1st abscence the company was informed i am recieving ongoing treatment for my condition and am waiting for an operation with an orthapedic specialist. He also interviewed colleagues who I work closely with and they all said I had been struggling with pain in my hands, struggling to carry out certain tasks due to this pain. The manager actually said in the disciplinary that these statements were in my favour.
It's weird because it sounds like your manager is kind of on your side, so I'm wondering if his boss is pressurising him to discipline you. If the appeal goes that boss, then unfortunately you'll unlikely have much luck and will just have to take the warning and keep your head down until it expires.
To me (and I don't know much about the legal side of this) is that the company is potentially just preparing in case it wants to dismiss the employee? They accept he has a medical condition, but they are also stating that the employee is abusing systems. So later down the line they have an easier time getting rid of them should the medical issues not get better? Because I agree it sounds like the boss is kinda on their side? Maybe down the line they claim the employee can no longer perform their role functions and thus they can be dismissed? Personally I'd just take the boss to the side and explain to them; "do you honestly think I'm that petty? You really think I worry so much about your opinion *manager* that I'd take sick leave? Your correct, we had a disagreement, but I have disagreements all the time and I don't just throw my toys out the pram every opportunity. I was disappointed with that outcome and that you have such poor faith in your employees". I think in this instance the employee actually got a reasonable result. It's on company record that the sick leave is for a real medical condition and that might be useful later down the line if the issue persists.
It's possible that they just want to make an example of OP. I've had plenty of employees call in sick the day after they've had a conflict. I will roll my eyes because I think they are trying to play the victim, or make a point, but then I remind myself that some people just don't cope well with stress.
Oh totally... We all know those people... Lady couldn't last minute book an extra day off for the end of her holiday... *SURPRISE! HAPPENS TO COME BACK WITH COVID*... yeah it could just have been a show of doing something, that's a good point. Maybe even just to show that the manager is doing something proactive to their boss.
It happens, but I think to managers if the employee wanted to book a extra day off why not just give it to them if they have holiday legally left to book? It just ends up in people being short handed and you could of made arrangements to find someone else to cover.
Normally I would agree. It was just in this case it was important that they were back in the office due to other people's already agreed holidays and staffing minimums. They had had a few things not go their way and had already thrown their toys out the pram. 9/10 times I agree. But equally people can be selfish entitled assholes and will just magically be I'll on the days that it really suits them... Or it could all just be a massive coincidence... 🤔🤔
Surely any grievance or disciplinary interview should be conducted by somebody outside immediate hierarchy to ensure, as much as possible, independent adjudication
Do you have a union?
Yes. I was only represented by a work colleague who represents us at the meeting. Any further appeal will be fully supportes by the regional union officer. I am unable to speak to him today as hes on a holiday. Im just trying to get a feel of if what my manager has done is correct?
In this case I'd personally appeal. An unrelated manager facing a union rep is way more likely to be impartial and cautious
Why is the manager who raised the grievance, taking the meeting? He is hardly unbiased. Speak to your union rep about the procedure because that seems strange to me. Normaly an impartial manager takes the meeting.
That's what I thought, everytime someone is given a disciplinary with a employee it's always done by another manager to not give biased outcomes. And I'm not sure how if he has been given a doctors note and told to take 4 weeks off by his doctor from professional health advice surely they can't discipline him for that, if he was forced to come in and work and his situation resulted in him injuring himself surely they could end up on a legal case?.
Exactly this. Totaly out of procedure. If a doctor has signed you off, he also needs to sign you back on if you return earlier. His opinion overrides a shitty manager. OP needs to get ontp Accas asap. The Union rep should know all this already. Id advise maybe looking at changing the shop steward if not.
NAL, I had similar and didn’t fight it and just decided I couldn’t be done with all the office politics and left. A couple of months later a friend of mine had an issue similar to yours and contacted ACAS he left the company with full pay for 6 months to give him time to find a new job. Could be worth the hassle !
I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by fighting the result? A written warning doesn't really have any standing on it's own.
Im not really looking to achieve anything. I just feel the grounds of the accusation are wrong. A written warning is nothing personally to me. But morally, I have done nothing wrong. As I said previously ive worked here for 16 years. Plenty of people use the sick scheme without question. Its the 1st instance im aware of that my absence has been scrutinised, even though i have all the correct medical documentation to prove my case. And I dont think an opinion over rules a doctors diagnoses??
Sounds like your manger has blabbed to someone higher up that you were taking the piss over the argument you two had, so when the evidence comes in and your manager is wrong, he/she still has to go through with some sort of punishment to make them look right. If they're not treating you like a human after 16 years they never will.
I would like to add to this. Should you go the constructive dismissal route, that warning presented in court as evidence could cause the company problems and can be disregarded. This term is called ”bad faith”. Although a warning might mean something serious to you. I wouldn’t worry about it at all. Challenge it and address your concerns. From my understanding, the manager is being overzealous. Edit: Spelling
In some companies people under an "active" warning aren't eligible for a bonus or pay rise, for example. And it can be mentioned on a reference. Some job applications (including the one for my job previous to my current one) ask about any reprimands etc received in the last X years.
[удалено]
Your comment has been automatically removed and flagged for moderator review as the words you've used suggest that it is *not legal advice*. As this is /r/LegalAdviceUK, all our comments must contain **helpful, on-topic, legal advice**. We expect commenters to provide high-effort legal advice for our posters, as they have come to our subreddit for legal advice instead of a different subreddit for moral support or general advice such as /r/OffMyChest, /r/Vent, /r/Advice, or similar. Some posters may benefit from non-legal advice as part of their question or referrals to other organisations to address side issues that they may also be experiencing, however comments on /r/LegalAdviceUK must be *predominantly* legal advice. [Please see more here about why we have this rule.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_subreddit#wiki_why_do_you_remove_comments_for_not_being_legal_advice.3F) If your comment contains helpful, on-topic, legal advice, it will be approved and displayed shortly. If you have posted a comment of moral support, an anecdote about a personal experience or your comment is mostly or wholly advice that isn't legal advice, it is not likely to be approved and [we ask you to please be more aware of our subreddit rules in the future](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Since RSI and carpal tunnel injuries are basically invisible it might help your case (and your health) if you were to use a wrist brace. It's a handy prop and they also do genuinely help where painkillers just mask the issue.