Employer refuses benefits for furloughed staff

Jeremy535897

Galloglass said:

@Lulabell_99

Is this not simpler than it looks? If any payment was made, it would be through PAYE (either tax-paid or not). Any PAYE payments to furloughed staff under PAYE during the furlough period would immediately be flagged up to HMRC under RTI. So it is a case that no payments can be made to furloughed staff without creating issues with HMRC.

There isn't a problem with paying more than the amount due under the furlough agreement, but no claim under CJRS will be available in respect of it.

prowla

Put yourself in the shoes of the people who have been working, whilst others have had an extended holiday on 80% pay; I think a recognition bonus to them, however it is dressed up, is a very good gesture.

HampshireH

The question here for me is have they actually refused you it?

You said you havent heard from anyone. Have you actually asked and been refused and if so what was their reasoning.

Until you have a clear understanding of the reasoning you won't be able to decide if its discrimination. (Though as above they can choose who they offer benefits to).

It seems odd to name it a hardship payment rather than a bonus.

Also the extra days holiday. Surely of the business is closed you would all not be working  that day?

Lulabell_99

Thanks for all of your comments and advice, whether helpful or critical. In quick summary
Yes they have refused to give the hardship payment to furloughed workers, I have this in writing
No it is not a bonus, the employees still working will all get a well deserved productivity bonus in Q4 (assuming the company meets shareholders expectations)
Furloughed workers are not productive and are therefore receiving no money from the company, we are getting 80% of our pay from the government in order for the company to keep everyone else employed. Furlough is not a holiday.
Everyone else is on 100% pay.
£500 would pay some peoples rent for a month. This could be critical in the coming months if we are all let go. Given the company lack of support for those on furlough, this looks very likely.
I understand that payments are at the company's discretion and completely understand this. I guess I would agree with the comment that they are just not a very good employer.

[Deleted User]

Lulabell_99 said:

No it is not a bonus, the employees still working will all get a well deserved productivity bonus in Q4 (assuming the company meets shareholders expectations)

Legally it will be a bonus. I can pay my employees a "Magical Marvellous Cake Fund", regardless of what I call it, it would still be a discretionary bonus.

Lulabell_99 said:

Furlough is not a holiday.

Many would disagree, time off work on either 80% of pay or full pay seems to be regarded by the majority as a holiday.

Lulabell_99 said:

£500 would pay some peoples rent for a month. This could be critical in the coming months if we are all let go. Given the company lack of support for those on furlough, this looks very likely.

It might pay someone's rent, it might not, that is irrelevant. The company has no obligation to you beyond the legal and contractual obligations, they can choose to help some, all or no people out, but that is their choice. The company probably has a choice, support some, let others go, some people keep a job, support all, company goes under, no one has a job.

Lulabell_99 said:

I understand that payments are at the company's discretion and completely understand this. I guess I would agree with the comment that they are just not a very good employer.

There are good and bad employers, there are employers that everyone thought were good on the verge of going under and there are bad employers thriving because they are willing to be unscrupulous although legal, there are others committing outright fraud for personal gain, that is unfortunately the way of the world. Many have had to undertake a level of pragmatism that they perhaps did not ever expect to have to do so that they survive, some will show favouritism to make sure they keep employees they deem key to their operations.

The employment market is going to be a mess for a year or two to come and companies will be a lot less "nice", for many it will be a very difficult time, that includes employers as well as employees. 

Jeremy535897

While it seems a bit strange for the employer to pay a hardship payment for those still at work, who logically would need it less than those on furlough at 80% of salary, it may suggest that the employer is investing goodwill in those employees they want to keep, and not in those who they may decide to make redundant when furlough stops being largely free to employers.

It also seems a bit strange to castigate an employer who makes what appears to be a generous (non-contractual) payment to some employees. Would they be still be described as a bad employer if they had made no hardship payments to any employees at all?

Lulabell_99

Jeremy535897 said:

While it seems a bit strange for the employer to pay a hardship payment for those still at work, who logically would need it less than those on furlough at 80% of salary, it may suggest that the employer is investing goodwill in those employees they want to keep, and not in those who they may decide to make redundant when furlough stops being largely free to employers.

It also seems a bit strange to castigate an employer who makes what appears to be a generous (non-contractual) payment to some employees. Would they be still be described as a bad employer if they had made no hardship payments to any employees at all?

This is missing the point a little, I am not castigating my employer at all, I have previously said that the payments are well deserved and I do not begrudge anyone getting them. My point was, why not all employees. If they really do wish to invest goodwill in those they are retaining then call it a "worked all through lockdown" bonus. 

Jeremy535897

Lulabell_99 said:

Jeremy535897 said:

While it seems a bit strange for the employer to pay a hardship payment for those still at work, who logically would need it less than those on furlough at 80% of salary, it may suggest that the employer is investing goodwill in those employees they want to keep, and not in those who they may decide to make redundant when furlough stops being largely free to employers.

It also seems a bit strange to castigate an employer who makes what appears to be a generous (non-contractual) payment to some employees. Would they be still be described as a bad employer if they had made no hardship payments to any employees at all?

This is missing the point a little, I am not castigating my employer at all, I have previously said that the payments are well deserved and I do not begrudge anyone getting them. My point was, why not all employees. If they really do wish to invest goodwill in those they are retaining then call it a "worked all through lockdown" bonus. 

You did say that  "I guess I would agree with the comment that they are just not a very good employer." I doubt you would have said that if none of these payments had been made to any employee. I suggested that you might enquire politely why they have chosen to pay it only to those who are working. 

They don't need to call it a "worked all through lockdown" bonus, since you say they are making those separately.

adamp87

Some employees who are on 100% wages may of even worse off than yourself during this period with having to pay travel costs, work lunches & such. This could be a welcome respite - it’s a token gesture to say thanks for their hard work during this time it sounds. I think it’s fair you aren’t offered it given you were on furlough. Appreciate furlough isn’t just the mass holiday people say it is, but I don’t think you can be angry at this.

diggingdude

I'm not sure i would be arguing this if on furlough, company may notice they are getting on fine without me