BEFORE-LEAVE — WORK AND COVER RECORD
Absence dates / timezone / last working window:
Expected return and first review window:
Work item / current version / approved location:
Current state and next required action:
Actual deadline / consequence of waiting:
Proposed cover / confirmation / coverage dates:
Decision owner / authority limits / separate approval:
Access and capacity confirmed, or still missing:
Fallback route if cover is unavailable:
Confirmed change / unresolved question / decision needed by:
Leave-period contact arrangement and confirmation:
Keep proposals separate from confirmed arrangements.

BEFORE-LEAVE — DECISION AND CONTACT CHECK
Question or exception requiring a decision:
Who has authority for that decision:
Proposal / confirmed / disputed / unknown:
Permitted decision and limits:
Required approval still outstanding:
Normal work route during absence:
Locally agreed urgent route and qualifying conditions:
Backup and what happens if unavailable:
Leave-worker contact, only if specifically agreed:
Who confirmed the arrangement / when / version:
Return review window and who updates the record:
Silence, a copied email and a contact name are not confirmation.

Sort what must happen before, during and after leave
List the work that can actually affect the absence window. An existing deadline, a waiting approval, an incoming queue and an item that can wait need different arrangements. A handover should not turn every unfinished task into a promise to complete it before leaving.
Check the real deadline and the consequence of waiting. If a requirement is mandatory, retain it and identify the authorised owner who can make a timing, scope or staffing decision. You do not gain permission to skip a check by writing “defer” in a worksheet.
Work items to sort for a dated absence
Item to record
Current state
Question for the work owner
Arrangement to confirm
Deadline falls during absence
Output is partly prepared.
Who can complete it within available time?
Named cover, remaining steps, deadline and acceptance criteria.
Approval is outstanding
Information is prepared; permission is not granted.
Who has authority, and is the approver available?
Decision owner, limits, required approval and fallback.
Routine incoming queue
New work may arrive after departure.
Who receives, sorts and acts on arrivals?
Coverage window, queue location and escalation rules.
Item can wait until return
No earlier requirement has been confirmed.
Who can confirm the later timing?
Actual agreed date, affected parties and restart owner.
Cover lacks time or access
A person is proposed but cannot yet perform the task.
Which capacity or resource decision is still needed?
Missing condition, authorised owner and decision window.
Critical fact is unresolved
Deadline, owner or risk information is unclear.
Who can clarify it before the affected work?
Unknown field stays visible; do not mark it covered.
New request arrives before departure
It adds work to an existing plan.
What changes in scope, timing or assignment?
Updated plan and confirmations rather than an invisible extra promise.
HSE's 
Demands standard
 includes adequate and achievable demands in relation to agreed hours. A table makes a capacity gap visible; it does not create extra hours for you or the person covering. If the preparation and handover themselves require time, include that work in the plan.
For a wider hours or priority conflict, use the workload priorities guide linked below. Keep the leave note focused on the work that will need a route during this particular absence.

A proposed contact is not confirmed temporary cover
Ask the receiving person or appropriate manager to confirm the coverage dates, tasks and limits. Check whether the person has the needed access, information, skills and time. A friendly offer to “keep an eye on things” may cover monitoring but not delivery, approval or an entire queue.
Questions that make cover usable
Cover question
Confirmation to seek
Assumption to avoid
Which dates and work are covered?
Actual absence window and specified outputs or arrivals.
One helpful reply covers every day and task.
What can the person decide?
Decision rights and the limits of that authority.
Covering a queue authorises a contract or vendor exception.
Can they use the work?
Current version, approved location and legitimate access.
A link guarantees access or permission.
Do they have capacity?
What other work changes if cover adds a material load.
Naming someone creates time in their schedule.
What counts as received or complete?
Relevant receipt and acceptance checks.
A sent message is automatically accepted.
What if the cover is unavailable?
Usable backup or escalation owner and route.
The absent worker becomes the fallback by default.
Keep approvals separate from operational receipt. Someone can confirm that they received the work without approving the outstanding exception inside it. If a decision requires more than one authorised approval, list the actual arrangement rather than forcing it into a one-person model.
A draft question is: “Could we confirm who handles the queue from [start] to [end], what they can decide, and where an exception goes? [Condition] is still missing. Who can decide the capacity or access change before [affected work]?” Adapt it to the real procedure and keep unanswered questions marked as open.
Store the actual documents in an approved work location. A general planning card can use task labels and links without reproducing customer records, credentials, private health details or other information that does not belong in it. Obtain access through the normal authorised process.

Agree ordinary questions, genuine urgency and your leave contact boundary
The team needs a usable route for work; you need a clear statement of the arrangement during your absence. Write both. “I will be away, but message me if needed” leaves the threshold, channel and response expectation open. It can turn the person on leave into the first contact for routine questions.
Use the organisation's actual urgent-work or incident procedure where one exists. This guide supplies no universal emergency definition, response time or legal entitlement to disconnect. A requester writing “urgent” does not by itself establish which procedure applies.
Contact arrangements to agree before departure
Situation
Route or decision to confirm
What the note should not imply
Ordinary task question
Named cover or agreed team queue with current work location.
Every question first goes to the person on leave.
Time-sensitive decision
Authorised decision owner and a backup within the real deadline.
A monitoring colleague can grant any approval.
Work incident or genuine emergency
Existing applicable incident or urgent route.
A generic article replaces safety or incident procedures.
Cover is unavailable
Appropriate manager or agreed fallback decides the next arrangement.
The absence is cancelled by an unanswered message.
Specific leave-worker contact is proposed
Whether contact is agreed, for what condition, by whom and through which channel.
A broad promise to monitor all channels or respond instantly.
An ordinary absence-message draft could say: “I am away [dates/timezone] and, under the agreed arrangement, will not monitor this inbox during that period. For [work], contact [confirmed route]. For [locally defined urgent category], use [existing route]. My first planned review of messages is [window].” Only describe monitoring and response arrangements that have actually been agreed or established for your role.
If limited contact is specifically agreed, record its conditions and channel without expanding it into routine availability. Confirm the actual expectations through the appropriate work arrangement. The worksheet cannot override an on-call duty, contract, formal leave process or applicable policy.
Use the map to find the missing arrangement. Writing a person's name or sending a note does not establish accepted cover.

EXPLAINED CASES

1. You send a handover to a colleague and receive no reply. Is temporary cover confirmed?
No. Keep the proposal and sending status separate from confirmation.
Use the actual receiving and allocation process to establish cover, dates and tasks. Silence or a copied message does not show that the colleague has accepted or has capacity.

2. Your cover agrees to receive a queue containing an outstanding contract exception. Does receipt approve the exception?
No. The separate approval remains outstanding.
Identify the actual authorised decision owner and limits. Receiving or sorting work does not grant authority for every decision inside it.

3. A helpful colleague is named in the plan but lacks required access and available time. Is the output now covered?
Not yet. Record the missing conditions and seek the relevant decisions.
Capacity and legitimate access are usable resources, not consequences of writing a name. Ask the authorised owner for an assignment or workload decision and follow the normal access process.

4. Your draft says you will check all work channels during leave, but no contact arrangement has been confirmed. Should that promise go into the final note automatically?
No. Confirm the actual leave-period contact arrangement first.
Clarify ordinary work, urgent routes and any specific leave-worker contact through the appropriate work process. The template neither assumes always-on availability nor overrides existing duties.

5. A new task is called urgent just before departure. May you silently skip its mandatory approval to finish sooner?
No. Keep the required approval and ask the authorised owner about the conflict.
A requester label or handover note does not waive a mandatory check. Scope, time, staffing and decision routes may need an authorised change.

6. Health needs attention or the situation feels unsafe while the handover is still incomplete. Must you finish every field before using support?
No. Use appropriate support and the applicable work process directly.
This is an optional planning aid, not a health assessment or an eligibility test. It should not delay care, urgent support or attention to unsafe work.

Sources checked 31 October 2026:
https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards/role.htm
https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards/support.htm
https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards/demands.htm
https://www.who.int/news/item/28-05-2019-burn-out-an-occupational-phenomenon-international-classification-of-diseases
Original planning templates; no diagnosis, validated intervention, universal leave rights or guaranteed employer approval.