Payroll furlough calculation correct? Zero hours

JackHat79

Hello MoneySavingExperts, a little advice if you can please.

I have been furloughed, with the furlough covering the standard 80%.  I have been employed by the company for 9+years on a zero hours basis, PAYE, weekly paid.  It's feast or famine; some weeks are great, some are not so hot.  They have other full-time, part-time and regularly employed employees, who they are also forloughing.

I refer to this from gov.uk:

Employees whose pay varies

If the employee has been employed for 12 months or more, you can claim the highest of either the:

• same month’s earning from the previous year
• average monthly earnings for the 2019-2020 tax year

If the employee has been employed for less than 12 months, claim for 80% of their average monthly earnings since they started work.

Although I appreciate I have been continuously employed for over 12 months, I only get work when I'm called, so I did not work or earn in each pay period last year, instead (being weekly paid) I worked for only 14 weeks in the tax year, with those weeks being scattered somewhat sporadically throughout the year. 

The furlough calculation my payroll department appear to have used is the sum of 2019/20 taxable income / 52 *.8

Should the calculation instead be the sum of 2019/20 taxable income/14 *.8, with fourteen being the number of pay periods in which I actually accrued the pay.

To calculate my average earnings based on a full year of pay periods seems a little unfair, given that I didn't earn it all week-in-week-out over the whole 52 week period.  Surely a more accurate reflection of what my normal take-home pay would be, is the sum of my annual taxable income divided by the pay periods in which it was actually accrued?  It's essentially the difference between a manageable wage and a token gesture.

Referring to the gov.uk quote above, was I employed for less than 12 months?   Whilst I am an employee whose pay does indeed vary, it varies not because I am regularly employed every month and some months simply work less or more hours than others, but because I only work when specifically called.  And when I am called, I would earn closer to the higher calculation per week, rather than the lower.  Should they pro-rata it?  Do I have grounds to approach payroll with my interpretation?

Thanks for your consideration.  I look forward to your learned responses.

FtbDreaming

But if you only worked 14 weeks last year why do you think you should be paid for every week now? Then you would be better off than if you was still just working your 14 weeks a year. 

unholyangel

There were 52 weeks in the 19/20 year. Some weeks you earned £0. Those 0's are included in calculating the average unfortunately. 

Nothing to stop you asking them to pay you more mind you. 

JackHat79

I take your point.  I would be considerably better off at that rate of pay if it was sustained for 52 weeks, but given that the furlough is only for 12 weeks, then I was hoping the payment would better reflect what I could reasonably expect to earn had I worked for those twelve weeks.  This is my only 'bricks and mortar' job; any other freelance work I had which suplemented my 14 weeks pay last year, has now ceased to be a thing.