Entire company furloughed

gj373

Hi
I work for a large company (more than 10000 employees). We have received a note from management saying entire company being furloughed from early April and put to 80% salary. No consultation, no request for consent to change contract terms and no indication that the alternative would be redundancy and no indication that they would otherwise be unable to pay in full. It appears they are trying to save costs to the business during this time. There is clearly still work I could do and currently working from home.
Does this sound right and does it fit with the job retention scheme?
Thanks

Jeremy535897

80% for doing nothing is better than redundancy.

gj373

Jeremy535897 said:

80% for doing nothing is better than redundancy.

Absolutely! My query is that the company has not said the alternative is redundancy. They have said they are shutting down to ensure everyone's health. 

Jeremy535897

Sorry for the shorthand (answering dozens of posts on here). What I should have said is as follows: You could go and see a manager and insist that they keep you on doing work, and point to your contract of employment. The manager will have a mountain of stuff to deal with and will probably say "that's the way it is, but we can always make you redundant if you prefer".

gj373

Jeremy535897 said:

Sorry for the shorthand (answering dozens of posts on here). What I should have said is as follows: You could go and see a manager and insist that they keep you on doing work, and point to your contract of employment. The manager will have a mountain of stuff to deal with and will probably say "that's the way it is, but we can always make you redundant if you prefer".

I'm sure that would be the case. However, it just seems that we are throwing whole swathes of employment law out the window at the moment. Anyway, would rather be furloughed than unemplyed.

Jeremy535897

I am sure that the niceties of employment law will take a beating over the next few weeks, but that wasn't my point. If your employer furloughs you, he is saying "we haven't anything for you to do now (what you believe about the veracity of that doesn't really matter), but instead of making you redundant, we have applied to the Government to get you 80% of your wages. Without that, we couldn't have kept you on and would have had to make you redundant."

gj373

Jeremy535897 said:

I am sure that the niceties of employment law will take a beating over the next few weeks, but that wasn't my point. If your employer furloughs you, he is saying "we haven't anything for you to do now (what you believe about the veracity of that doesn't really matter), but instead of making you redundant, we have applied to the Government to get you 80% of your wages. Without that, we couldn't have kept you on and would have had to make you redundant."

If they said that I'd understand but they are saying they are furloughing to keep everyone healthy.

mwarby

In a way they are, as a whole. They're saying nobody needs to worry about work, weather they can work from home etc, they're saying everyone is getting paid. That makes it easier for everyone to self isolate, and not worry about needing to find new work

gj373

mwarby said:

In a way they are, as a whole. They're saying nobody needs to worry about work, weather they can work from home etc, they're saying everyone is getting paid. That makes it easier for everyone to self isolate, and not worry about needing to find new work

I guess I'm just not clear if that is a legitimate reason to furlough. Guess more will become clear over the next few days.

When this blows over there may be a lot of people claiming breach of contract if companies rush to do this.

mwarby

Companies can't win, some will go to tribunal becuase they werent furloughed, while others may do same because they were

LynRose

I am also laid off. Started a new job, 2/3/20, 35 hours per week, contracted. Prior to being out of work. I think I may have to claim UC DWP? Due to not being on the payroll in Feb 2020. Any advice or clarity.