Who is STILL furloughed.

epm-84

Scoobs2006 said:

I'm just concerned, companies are using furlough as free money effectively adding the money to their budget forecasts. I know of someone who has been told not back until November but the company has made redundancies with higher earners. I was just curious to see if this is most companies strategy? 

Maybe they see their budget stretching far enough to retain a low earner but not to retain higher earners?

Dr_Crypto

Travel is nowhere near back to strength so plenty of people there still off.
Hospitality still very much diminished for example no conferences and hotels only partly full. 

Nightclubs still closed but I can’t see them having many full timers. 

Sports venues and stadiums closed. 

We are still miles off having a fully functioning economy. 

Sanne

I’m still on furlough and have been told this week that me and my team most likely won’t be back until 1st November (definitely not before mid-October at the very earliest). Working in travel; just over 1/3 of the business has been made redundant, 1/3 has been on furlough since March or April and just under 1/3 (based on workforce in February) is working.

Redundancies have been across the board, from department heads down to the lowest paid.

Jonesy1977

Recruitment, talent/learning and development, marketing/events, reception/facilities, catering, travel teams to name a few functions still likely to be furloughed.  It is worth remembering that furlough is short term lay off and the Corona Virus Job Retention Scheme allows companies to reclaim some of the money (decreasing) they are paying to staff to keep them employed in this period.  The cost of furlough is high, holidays still accrued and employment rights (redundancy rights) are still intact.  No legitimate company would be using CJRS to save money only, if the role someone was doing added nothing to the bottom line of a business then the role would not exist so it is likely that if someone is still furloughed at this point then there will be a plan (or hope) that they will return to their role even if this is in a reduced capacity.  That is not to say there is not exploitation of the scheme and some 3000 demands for repayment of CJRS were sent out by HMRC yesterday.   If you are still furloughed then be happy that your company has not taken you of life support, they do not have to furlough you, they will only be doing this to try and save the jobs they will need as we come out of this (assuming they survive)

adamp87

We are using flex furlough with staff, as we are closed 2 days a week due to the huge dip in business since re-opening. 

This is preventing us letting people go at the moment & helping the business cash flow, come October we’ll be taking everyone back on it’s looking like but this scheme has been a real help in reopening & such. 

epm-84

Jonesy1977 said:

The cost of furlough is high, holidays still accrued and employment rights (redundancy rights) are still intact.  

Another way of looking at it is option a might be to furlough the staff, option b might be to make staff redundant and then go through the recruitment process to get new staff in a few months time and spend time training them up.  Option a is low cost compared to option b.

Many employers didn't write short term lay off clauses in to contracts, businesses like airlines with seasonal demand were an exception, so without the furlough scheme employers couldn't have done short term layoffs unless employees voluntarily agreed to take unpaid leave, which probably would have needed an incentive from the employer.

Thrugelmir

epm-84 said:

Jonesy1977 said:

The cost of furlough is high, holidays still accrued and employment rights (redundancy rights) are still intact.  

Another way of looking at it is option a might be to furlough the staff, option b might be to make staff redundant and then go through the recruitment process to get new staff in a few months time and spend time training them up.  Option a is low cost compared to option b.

With many now homeworking. Option B is problematic. Induction courses and training a complete nightmare. Let alone recruitment. 

louie7972

No longer on Furlough as of July.  I was an agency worker via an umbrella company (PAYE). Furlough was so astronomically low even based on my basic.  More like 50%.  I thought I would have been entitled to some holiday pay as per working time regulations, but umbrella company advising it was already included in Furlough payment?  Not possible as per my basic Math! The struggle continues.

rosiesposies

Thrugelmir said:

epm-84 said:

Jonesy1977 said:

The cost of furlough is high, holidays still accrued and employment rights (redundancy rights) are still intact.  

Another way of looking at it is option a might be to furlough the staff, option b might be to make staff redundant and then go through the recruitment process to get new staff in a few months time and spend time training them up.  Option a is low cost compared to option b.

With many now homeworking. Option B is problematic. Induction courses and training a complete nightmare. Let alone recruitment. 

In option b scenario now Altho not due to any redundancies but vacanacies to fill. Both training and recruitment have been a nightmare to do remotely, made even more difficult due to ban on recruitment agency spend. would hope most would push for option a. 

kathynewbie09

Still furloughed due to pregnancy. Very rarely hear anything from work unless it's from my husband who works for the same company just opposite shift pattern. Was advised when put on furlough to expect to be furloughed until it's safe for me to go back to work.