Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
The working material is functional recommendations, role demands and employee input; the intended result is a staged return-to-work proposal. Recording that pair prevents a vague approval from spreading to other uses.
- 1Task and owner
- People partner wants to plan a return to work after illness. The policy check should identify who can approve, correct or withdraw a staged return-to-work proposal.
- 2Information involved
- Functional recommendations, role demands and employee input. Account for every route by which the tool receives the material, including plug-ins and linked storage.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Treat a new plug-in or connector as a change to the approved setup.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a staged return-to-work proposal. State whether another person will see it, rely on it or receive an action produced from it.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- Health details are sensitive and the plan can affect employment rights and recovery. A familiar task still needs escalation when this consequence becomes plausible.
- 6Human review
- occupational health, employee and manager should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. The reviewer needs the source material and must be able to reject the output before it takes effect.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
A routine route is easier to justify when the exact account is approved, only the minimum sensitive employee health information is used, a staged return-to-work proposal remains within the stated purpose, and occupational health, employee and manager reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Pause the ordinary route whenever the account or data handling is uncertain, health details are sensitive and the plan can affect employment rights and recovery, or a staged return-to-work proposal reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The proposed use should pause if restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before occupational health, employee and manager can intervene, or use necessary functional information and agree the plan with the employee cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Which approved account will perform plan a return to work after illness, and what external connections can it reach?
- 02
What is the most sensitive element in functional recommendations, role demands and employee input, and does the tool need it?
- 03
Who receives a staged return-to-work proposal, and what will they do with it?
- 04
Does occupational health, employee and manager have enough authority and time to stop the result?
- 05
Which change in tool, data, purpose or impact would require a fresh request?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- people partner
- task
- Use AI to plan a return to work after illness.
- information
- functional recommendations, role demands and employee input
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Draft or analyse
- impact
- Employment support
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- occupational health, employee and manager
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Use necessary functional information and agree the plan with the employee
- ✓
Reduce functional recommendations, role demands and employee input to the smallest useful extract and remove fields unrelated to a staged return-to-work proposal.
- ✓
Write the boundary around a staged return-to-work proposal clearly so later users do not expand the approval by assumption.
- ✓
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of functional recommendations, role demands and employee input into the audit trail.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to plan a return to work after illness automatically allowed?
Permission depends on the facts submitted for this request. A different tool, information class, region or use of a staged return-to-work proposal can produce another route.
What does the policy need to know about this use?
Describe a staged return-to-work proposal, identify functional recommendations, role demands and employee input, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how occupational health, employee and manager will review it.
How much of the request should the company retain?
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of functional recommendations, role demands and employee input into the audit trail. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying functional recommendations, role demands and employee input would create unnecessary risk.