Furlough some staff, but no work for others?

redheadedlady

For the past 18 months both my brother and I have been working zero hours contracts for the same agency for the same client.  We're classed as key workers.  I've now been furloughed, but my brother hasn't.  When he contacted the agency he was told that only some staff were being furloughed.  However there's not enough work at the client company for the agency staff they haven't furloughed.  My brother's had one day's work in the past three weeks, and they (I'm not sure if it's the agency or the client) seem to be spreading the work around between the agency staff.  Obviously they're giving priority to the people who work for them on a self employed basis (we have no quibble with that) but is it right that some workers can be furloughed on 80% of pay and stay at home safe, while others are having to work a day a fortnight on average and obviously coming out with far less and also having to work in close contact with colleagues?  Some of the furloughed staff are retired people who do the agency work simply to top up their pension, whereas for some of the non furloughed staff (including my brother) this is currently their only source of income since being made redundant from previous jobs.  Is there a right to ask to be furloughed if it's better income that he'd get if he still works a day here and there, with the furlough income based on previous average earnings?

sharpe106

I would guess it was the agency that was spreading the work around. I doubt very much the client cares unless each member of agency staff has a specific skill set they need. The agency is probably doing this to cut down on their own costs, i.e having to furlough everybody. There is nothing stopping them for doing this. 

gary83

You have no right to furlough, it’s entirely at the discretion of the agency.

redheadedlady

Thank you. I thought he had no right to furlough, but hoped it was different.  We'd both love to know how the agency decided who would be furloughed and who wouldn't though, as it doesn't appear to be logical.  They're aware that my brother has no other form of income at present, and know that at least two other people who haven't been furloughed are in the same situation.  My brother doesn't mind still working, he's aware that zero hours means just that, but not being furloughed and being down to around a tenth of his previous average income is causing him a lot of hardship.  I imagine it's the same for the others who aren't furloughed and have a lot less work than before. 

gary83

A lot of agencies haven’t furloughed anyone at all because of the cost to them. 

If I was an agency and I gave you 1 day a weeks work you would cost me nothing, I’d still make a profit out of you, it would just be much less than I was making out of you before. However if I decided to furlough you I’d have to spend the time administering the furlough scheme & you’d continue to accrue a holiday allowance for your time on furlough which I’d be responsible for, I’d be spending time and money on you but be getting no income for you, you’d be costing me money.