Employer cheating coronavirus job retention scheme / furlough??

Comms69

dsccrbstck said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

nicechap said:

dsccrbstck said:

Hi there. I hope someone can help.
I've been employed at the same small company for over 8 years.

They only pay me for the hours I have worked, even though it has always been a regular pattern/schedule of 20-25 hours per week for the last 8 years.

In March work slowed down tremendously due to coronavirus and by April there was literally zero work forecast for me to do. In early April I requested that they please use the gov scheme so that I can receive 80% of my normal wages until the pandemic is over.

They never gave me a straight answer until a few days ago, when they gave me notice of immediate redundancy. They offered me the statutory minimum redundancy package (7 weeks' pay) and said that they did not want to deal with 'the reams of paperwork involved with the scheme'.

I responded asking for 8 weeks' pay in lieu of notice as well, as I understand that is what I am legally entitled to. 

This is when things got messy. I received an email that was accidentally copied to me from the accountant. It said that they should pay me what I requested, and that they should 'at least be able to recover something from the scheme'; that the 'net cost in the end will be lower'. It also had in bold letters stating that '[my name] should not be involved'.

I later received an email from my employer saying that they will only pay the redundancy package + 4 weeks' notice pay, which will be done on 30 April.

I have 2 main questions:
- Could my employer possibly be planning to cheat the system by claiming furlough money under my name and not passing it on to me?
- What should I really be receiving / what am I legally entitled to when they decide to terminate me with immediate effect now? I have not received/will not be receiving a salary for April since there have been no work. 

Thank you so much. My employer has always been very dodgy; they never treat any of their staff the right way and I just want to protect myself...

Did you get paid holidays?  Are you owed any?

No.. I recently enquired about this as they made me believe I wasn't entitled to any. But they told me that it is 'rolled up' into my rate..

And how much did you get paid? 

About £20/hour but I don't know how much of that is supposed to be the 'holiday' it was never really discussed  at the beginning and does not show on my payslips

Ok none of this makes sense. 

I'll be honest i think you need an employment solicitor. Because that wage is 50% higher than the national avg roughly. Which make me cautious. 

dsccrbstck

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

nicechap said:

dsccrbstck said:

Hi there. I hope someone can help.
I've been employed at the same small company for over 8 years.

They only pay me for the hours I have worked, even though it has always been a regular pattern/schedule of 20-25 hours per week for the last 8 years.

In March work slowed down tremendously due to coronavirus and by April there was literally zero work forecast for me to do. In early April I requested that they please use the gov scheme so that I can receive 80% of my normal wages until the pandemic is over.

They never gave me a straight answer until a few days ago, when they gave me notice of immediate redundancy. They offered me the statutory minimum redundancy package (7 weeks' pay) and said that they did not want to deal with 'the reams of paperwork involved with the scheme'.

I responded asking for 8 weeks' pay in lieu of notice as well, as I understand that is what I am legally entitled to. 

This is when things got messy. I received an email that was accidentally copied to me from the accountant. It said that they should pay me what I requested, and that they should 'at least be able to recover something from the scheme'; that the 'net cost in the end will be lower'. It also had in bold letters stating that '[my name] should not be involved'.

I later received an email from my employer saying that they will only pay the redundancy package + 4 weeks' notice pay, which will be done on 30 April.

I have 2 main questions:
- Could my employer possibly be planning to cheat the system by claiming furlough money under my name and not passing it on to me?
- What should I really be receiving / what am I legally entitled to when they decide to terminate me with immediate effect now? I have not received/will not be receiving a salary for April since there have been no work. 

Thank you so much. My employer has always been very dodgy; they never treat any of their staff the right way and I just want to protect myself...

Did you get paid holidays?  Are you owed any?

No.. I recently enquired about this as they made me believe I wasn't entitled to any. But they told me that it is 'rolled up' into my rate..

And how much did you get paid? 

About £20/hour but I don't know how much of that is supposed to be the 'holiday' it was never really discussed  at the beginning and does not show on my payslips

Ok none of this makes sense. 

I'll be honest i think you need an employment solicitor. Because that wage is 50% higher than the national avg roughly. Which make me cautious. 

The wage is on the lower end of average for the job that I am doing
But you are right I probably need an expert opinion. They are now saying that I don't get sick pay because it is also 'rolled up'.

Savvy_Sue

If holiday pay is rolled up, it must be shown as a separate item on your payslip - doesn't sound like yours is. 

Statutory Sick Pay is definitely not rolled up ... if you're entitled to it, you should get it!

dsccrbstck

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

ceh209 said:

It sounds like you are on a zero hours contract, although you will need to confirm this as we can't read your contract for you
In which case even if you are entitled to 8 weeks notice, they could just not give you any hours for those 8 weeks, and hence, zero pay - unrelated to the furlough scheme.

For what it's worth, I agree with their accountant, it's hardly much paperwork really and you'd be better off, with them no worse off. But you can't force them to use the furlough scheme if they don't want to.

They didn't give me a written contract, or have refused to. However I have always worked the same number of hours every week/month for the last 8 years and I am expected to do the work I am given within a set timeframe..

Perhaps I didn't phrase it right - what the accountant was saying was that my employer could use the scheme to 'recover something' (even though they explicitly told me they were going to make me redundant instead).

Cant be zero hours without a written contract. 

Sorry I forgot to ask about this - so an employee cannot be on zero-hours terms unless there is a written contract? 

Comms69

dsccrbstck said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

ceh209 said:

It sounds like you are on a zero hours contract, although you will need to confirm this as we can't read your contract for you
In which case even if you are entitled to 8 weeks notice, they could just not give you any hours for those 8 weeks, and hence, zero pay - unrelated to the furlough scheme.

For what it's worth, I agree with their accountant, it's hardly much paperwork really and you'd be better off, with them no worse off. But you can't force them to use the furlough scheme if they don't want to.

They didn't give me a written contract, or have refused to. However I have always worked the same number of hours every week/month for the last 8 years and I am expected to do the work I am given within a set timeframe..

Perhaps I didn't phrase it right - what the accountant was saying was that my employer could use the scheme to 'recover something' (even though they explicitly told me they were going to make me redundant instead).

Cant be zero hours without a written contract. 

Sorry I forgot to ask about this - so an employee cannot be on zero-hours terms unless there is a written contract? 

correct     

seatbeltnoob

the job retention scheme is very simple to claim I have done this for my own business. If this is how the repay someone for 8 years of service, I'd hate to think what they'd do to their enemies.

You're 8 years in so you can claim unfair dismissal and take them onto an employment tribunal. So whether they do it now, or 4 months down the line after putting you in the job retention scheme makes no difference legally.

If they're stupid enough to clam the job retention money and keep it for themselves then that's on them. They even have accountants who advise them so I can't see how they have overlooked this, it would be really stupid of them claim job retention after firing you because everything is done through NI number, it's now reported to HMRC via RTI, it's all linked up and when/if you apply for universal credit, your payslip earnings are shown on the system.

Masomnia

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

ceh209 said:

It sounds like you are on a zero hours contract, although you will need to confirm this as we can't read your contract for you
In which case even if you are entitled to 8 weeks notice, they could just not give you any hours for those 8 weeks, and hence, zero pay - unrelated to the furlough scheme.

For what it's worth, I agree with their accountant, it's hardly much paperwork really and you'd be better off, with them no worse off. But you can't force them to use the furlough scheme if they don't want to.

They didn't give me a written contract, or have refused to. However I have always worked the same number of hours every week/month for the last 8 years and I am expected to do the work I am given within a set timeframe..

Perhaps I didn't phrase it right - what the accountant was saying was that my employer could use the scheme to 'recover something' (even though they explicitly told me they were going to make me redundant instead).

Cant be zero hours without a written contract. 

Sorry I forgot to ask about this - so an employee cannot be on zero-hours terms unless there is a written contract? 

correct     

All employees/workers have the right to written terms from day 1 now. For anyone who started prior to April this year they still have a right if employed for 2 months.

Where does the can't be zero hours if not written thing come from? As I'm sure you can still count as a worker for the relevant rights under the employment rights act with an oral contract and without guaranteed hours. I might be wrong though, it does happen!

dsccrbstck

seatbeltnoob said:

the job retention scheme is very simple to claim I have done this for my own business. If this is how the repay someone for 8 years of service, I'd hate to think what they'd do to their enemies.

You're 8 years in so you can claim unfair dismissal and take them onto an employment tribunal. So whether they do it now, or 4 months down the line after putting you in the job retention scheme makes no difference legally.

If they're stupid enough to clam the job retention money and keep it for themselves then that's on them. They even have accountants who advise them so I can't see how they have overlooked this, it would be really stupid of them claim job retention after firing you because everything is done through NI number, it's now reported to HMRC via RTI, it's all linked up and when/if you apply for universal credit, your payslip earnings are shown on the system.

I was given notice of immediate termination on 19 April. As I mentioned earlier, they only offered (approximately) 4 weeks PILON (instead of 8). The number they gave me was essentially a rounded up, net number. I was trying to fight for my rights but what they did was just dump the cash into my account asap and according to them it is 'final and settled'.

Following this I requested for a P45. I asked to confirm that my leaving date is 19 April but have had no answer until today when the accountant has told me he will process my April pay (I only worked 5 hours) and then 'put the PILON into the May payroll'.

Is this legal?? Could they be doing this so that it appears I am employed until the end of May (so they can claim the coronavirus benefit)???

Comms69

Masomnia said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

Comms69 said:

dsccrbstck said:

ceh209 said:

It sounds like you are on a zero hours contract, although you will need to confirm this as we can't read your contract for you
In which case even if you are entitled to 8 weeks notice, they could just not give you any hours for those 8 weeks, and hence, zero pay - unrelated to the furlough scheme.

For what it's worth, I agree with their accountant, it's hardly much paperwork really and you'd be better off, with them no worse off. But you can't force them to use the furlough scheme if they don't want to.

They didn't give me a written contract, or have refused to. However I have always worked the same number of hours every week/month for the last 8 years and I am expected to do the work I am given within a set timeframe..

Perhaps I didn't phrase it right - what the accountant was saying was that my employer could use the scheme to 'recover something' (even though they explicitly told me they were going to make me redundant instead).

Cant be zero hours without a written contract. 

Sorry I forgot to ask about this - so an employee cannot be on zero-hours terms unless there is a written contract? 

correct     

All employees/workers have the right to written terms from day 1 now. For anyone who started prior to April this year they still have a right if employed for 2 months.

Where does the can't be zero hours if not written thing come from? As I'm sure you can still count as a worker for the relevant rights under the employment rights act with an oral contract and without guaranteed hours. I might be wrong though, it does happen!

Ill be honest it's been a while so i'll try to track down where it came from. But I'm certain it was a judgment at some point. 
It basically stemmed from a scenario like the OPs where there was no written contract but they worked regular hours. The employer argued it was zero hours, but the court decided that with no contract to state what it was, it was deemed to be a contract of employment at set number of hours. - granted the details arent fresh in my head at the moment

Undervalued

Masomnia said:

   

All employees/workers have the right to written terms from day 1 now. For anyone who started prior to April this year they still have a right if employed for 2 months.

Where does the can't be zero hours if not written thing come from? As I'm sure you can still count as a worker for the relevant rights under the employment rights act with an oral contract and without guaranteed hours. I might be wrong though, it does happen!

But is it still not basically unenforceable?

Unless that has also changed (and I am getting out of date) you cannot bring an action for that failure on its own, only add it to another valid claim if you have one. Even then, although a tribunal could award you some extra money it is no longer automatic?