We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Shielding but not entitled to furlough?

2»

Comments

  • calcotti
    calcotti Posts: 15,696 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 3 April 2020 at 6:07PM
    If a person receives the "12 Week" Shielding Letter and has to self isolate, are they entitled to furlough if their job/role is still operating and another person has had to fill their role? 
    Example: A receptionist has received the letter from the NHS requiring them to self-isolate.  However, the job is still required to be fulfilled and a replacement has taken over their job on the reception. Therefore, the company does have work for them and the job is not in anyway redundant.
    Is the person on self-isolation eligible for furlough?
    Just wanted to add that shielding and self-isolating are not the same thing. Self-isolating refers to people who have symptoms of CVID-19 or are living with someone who has them. Social distancing and shielding are protective measures to reduce the risk of being infected. It is mixing up the terminology that causes confusion about what rights someone has.
    A person who is self-isolating is to be treated as sick and cannot be furloughed, but would be entitled to SSP (if employed). A period of self-isolation is a period of 7 days or 14 days depending on the reason for self-isolating.

    Your example and question go to the heart of the argument about whether a person who is shielding can be furloughed even if other employees are not being furloughed. The argument would be that an employer should take reasonable steps to assist the employee to shield themselves. The reasonable step is to allow them to work at home. They cannot do the work at home, therefore the employer cannot provide that employee with any work. Therefore that employee can be furloughed. I simply don't know that this falls within the scope of the scheme, I am inclined to the view that it is a leap too far.
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-to-employers-and-businesses-about-covid-19/guidance-for-employers-and-businesses-on-coronavirus-covid-19#what-to-do-if-an-employee-needs-time-off-work-to-look-after-someone
    • employees from defined vulnerable groups should be strongly advised and supported to stay at home and work from there if possible
    Information I post is for England unless otherwise stated. Some rules may be different in other parts of UK.
  • sharpe106
    sharpe106 Posts: 3,558 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    I think it is a leap to far, but certainly nothing that the government has said. 
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.