Not fairly furloughed

Galloglass

Even the ones furloughed have found it unfair and strange because on the shop floor its been very much business as usual. 

In any contractual relation (i.e employment contract) there is a mechanism to resolve differences which your hubby should take. It will be described as "grievance process" or similar. 

And in line with established contract principles, the longer he leaves it to raise the issue, the more likely it will be considered to have accepted the situation described as "unfair and strange".

gary83

HollyTrees said:. Like I explained the company are only doing this because they can take advantage of the government furlough scheme. The injustice is the government should work out which companies need it and those that don't first. 

Looking back at statements on just the first day HMRC opened the  furlough scheme to registrations from company they had 140,000 companies register with around a million employees. How long do you think it would have taken HMRC to work through that backlog? By the end of the scheme the last figures I saw was it’d covered 9.3 million jobs. How long would it take to assess every company and every job role? It’s not really a practical suggestion is it?

Do you take your self entitled & bitter view of the world everywhere else? For instance, using your logic it’s “not fair” that some people’s children are using Schools whilst those with no kids are still paying for it? You could argue it’s not fair that people with critical life threatening diseases get treatments that sometimes cost many thousands on the NHS whilst those of us lucky enough to be healthy get nothing back from the health service but still keep paying towards it. 

You could argue that, making yourself more frustrated and angry, or you could stop whinging about life being not fair in the middle of a pandemic, You could appreciate that your husband has got off relatively lightly compared to many people and stop feeling so bitter and twisted about it. 

LilElvis

HollyTrees said:

LilElvis said:

HollyTrees said:

Jonesy1977 said:

HollyTrees said:

sharpe106 said:

If they were just taking advantage of the scheme they would have done it for far more then 3 weeks. They would have been rotating staff in and out of it. Which quite a lot of companies probably have done. Just to save some money even if they had no intention of getting rid of the staff.  

No because we have hundreds of staff and started furloughing late anyway. It would have been impossible for everyone to have a turn. But that doesnt make it fair. 

Hollytrees, the reason why you have had so many incredulous responses is because you do not seem to be tethered in reality here.  You suggesting that your husband is annoyed that he has not had his “turn” at being laid off due to shortage of work (furlough doesn’t sound as good now) he is also annoyed that he has to use holiday to help a company which has employed him for many years in a global pandemic which has certainly effected them.  Livelihoods are being lost, people have died families have been separated, companies have had to take on incredible debts................and you are looking for support for your husband being annoyed that he wasn’t laid off to enjoy a 3 week holiday on full pay?  

But my hubby isn't alone in feeling hard done by.  Even the ones furloughed have found it unfair and strange because on the shop floor its been very much business as usual. Like I explained the company are only doing this because they can take advantage of the government furlough scheme. The injustice is the government should work out which companies need it and those that don't first. 
By the time they started furloughing my hubby came home and said, hang on we worked all through lockdown, now they are furloughing, this doesn't make sense. So he rang his union, and they said its because they are being cheeky and taking advantage of the furlough scheme. 

Had the Government tried to implement a scheme whereby employers were required to prove a need to furlough staff before doing so then the unemployment figures would have been off the charts within a couple of weeks of lockdown. Over the coming years HMRC will be rigorously investigating claims under the scheme and clawing back money claimed fraudulently - that's a given.

I suspect that the union rep at the end of the phone knows about as much regarding the employer's financial situation as you and your "hubby" - i.e. nothing.

Well its a big French corporate company which has sites all over the world, where hubby works is a tiny fish in a giant pond. 

My husband also works for a large, foreign owned multinational and such organisations are generally very bureaucratic. The husband had to complete in-depth analysis, projections and matrices to justify which members of his staff were to be placed on furlough - it wasn't a decision based on how much they could fleece from the Government but what was required to maintain at least a break-even in cash flow. One would expect that the vast majority of large employers will have utilised a similar strategy - a million miles away from your misguided belief as to how they operate.

Grumpy_chap

Also, being a big corporate and it was BAU even with a number of people on furlough, the possibility of imminent 'right sizing' is a certainty.

Barny1979

Grumpy_chap said:

If they can have "business as usual" with a group of staff furloughed, then "right sizing" has to be near.

Is there an echo in here?

Grumpy_chap

Barny1979 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

If they can have "business as usual" with a group of staff furloughed, then "right sizing" has to be near.

Is there an echo in here?

If there is, the OP can't hear it.

Thrugelmir

HollyTrees said:

Jonesy1977 said:

HollyTrees said:

sharpe106 said:

If they were just taking advantage of the scheme they would have done it for far more then 3 weeks. They would have been rotating staff in and out of it. Which quite a lot of companies probably have done. Just to save some money even if they had no intention of getting rid of the staff.  

No because we have hundreds of staff and started furloughing late anyway. It would have been impossible for everyone to have a turn. But that doesnt make it fair. 

Hollytrees, the reason why you have had so many incredulous responses is because you do not seem to be tethered in reality here.  You suggesting that your husband is annoyed that he has not had his “turn” at being laid off due to shortage of work (furlough doesn’t sound as good now) he is also annoyed that he has to use holiday to help a company which has employed him for many years in a global pandemic which has certainly effected them.  Livelihoods are being lost, people have died families have been separated, companies have had to take on incredible debts................and you are looking for support for your husband being annoyed that he wasn’t laid off to enjoy a 3 week holiday on full pay?  

But my hubby isn't alone in feeling hard done by.  Even the ones furloughed have found it unfair and strange because on the shop floor its been very much business as usual. Like I explained the company are only doing this because they can take advantage of the government furlough scheme. The injustice is the government should work out which companies need it and those that don't first. 
By the time they started furloughing my hubby came home and said, hang on we worked all through lockdown, now they are furloughing, this doesn't make sense. So he rang his union, and they said its because they are being cheeky and taking advantage of the furlough scheme. 

The Union doesn't run the company though. (Thank goodness). 

Biscuit49

HollyTrees said:

Jonesy1977 said:

HollyTrees said:

sharpe106 said:

If they were just taking advantage of the scheme they would have done it for far more then 3 weeks. They would have been rotating staff in and out of it. Which quite a lot of companies probably have done. Just to save some money even if they had no intention of getting rid of the staff.  

No because we have hundreds of staff and started furloughing late anyway. It would have been impossible for everyone to have a turn. But that doesnt make it fair. 

Hollytrees, the reason why you have had so many incredulous responses is because you do not seem to be tethered in reality here.  You suggesting that your husband is annoyed that he has not had his “turn” at being laid off due to shortage of work (furlough doesn’t sound as good now) he is also annoyed that he has to use holiday to help a company which has employed him for many years in a global pandemic which has certainly effected them.  Livelihoods are being lost, people have died families have been separated, companies have had to take on incredible debts................and you are looking for support for your husband being annoyed that he wasn’t laid off to enjoy a 3 week holiday on full pay?  

But my hubby isn't alone in feeling hard done by.  Even the ones furloughed have found it unfair and strange because on the shop floor its been very much business as usual. Like I explained the company are only doing this because they can take advantage of the government furlough scheme. The injustice is the government should work out which companies need it and those that don't first. 
By the time they started furloughing my hubby came home and said, hang on we worked all through lockdown, now they are furloughing, this doesn't make sense. So he rang his union, and they said its because they are being cheeky and taking advantage of the furlough scheme. 

HollyTrees said:

Jonesy1977 said:

HollyTrees said:

sharpe106 said:

If they were just taking advantage of the scheme they would have done it for far more then 3 weeks. They would have been rotating staff in and out of it. Which quite a lot of companies probably have done. Just to save some money even if they had no intention of getting rid of the staff.  

No because we have hundreds of staff and started furloughing late anyway. It would have been impossible for everyone to have a turn. But that doesnt make it fair. 

Hollytrees, the reason why you have had so many incredulous responses is because you do not seem to be tethered in reality here.  You suggesting that your husband is annoyed that he has not had his “turn” at being laid off due to shortage of work (furlough doesn’t sound as good now) he is also annoyed that he has to use holiday to help a company which has employed him for many years in a global pandemic which has certainly effected them.  Livelihoods are being lost, people have died families have been separated, companies have had to take on incredible debts................and you are looking for support for your husband being annoyed that he wasn’t laid off to enjoy a 3 week holiday on full pay?  

But my hubby isn't alone in feeling hard done by.  Even the ones furloughed have found it unfair and strange because on the shop floor its been very much business as usual. Like I explained the company are only doing this because they can take advantage of the government furlough scheme. The injustice is the government should work out which companies need it and those that don't first. 
By the time they started furloughing my hubby came home and said, hang on we worked all through lockdown, now they are furloughing, this doesn't make sense. So he rang his union, and they said its because they are being cheeky and taking advantage of the furlough scheme. 

You are right, in an ideal world the Government would have worked out who needed it and didn't.

Of course had such measures and steps taken place they would probably still be going through the list and businesses would now be closed down country wide and millions unemployed.

The government had to take drastic steps in a very short space of time and of course it wasnt going to be perfect, but it was a damn site better than millions of us being on benefits and looking for work.

Time2Go_25

While a lot of this might be regarded as jealousy, if as it was alluded to those who have been furloughed are not being forced to take holiday in August and can therefore just take it when they like, whereas those who have worked all the way through are having to take holiday, it does seem a little unfair. 

DiamondLil

pdel61 said:

While a lot of this might be regarded as jealousy, if as it was alluded to those who have been furloughed are not being forced to take holiday in August and can therefore just take it when they like, whereas those who have worked all the way through are having to take holiday, it does seem a little unfair. 

Perhaps this is due to the possibility that those on furlough won't be there long enough to worry about when to take holidays.