Can I get a job and immediately be furloughed?

Dakta

I have a nasty feeling that whilst it might seem unfair working when some people get furlough pay and aren't - in the long run I think the real battle is going to be staying in a job at all.

I've worked all through this period personally, if I had been furloughed I would have been quite conscious of a heightened risk of not returning, which can happen to anyone but I think being put on furlough would make my concerns ever greater. (which is something that happened to a couple of family members).

What I'm trying to say is I've never looked at people on furlough with envy because they don't have to work, because being paid whilst not being productive is a very risky position to be in in a variety of ways.

Comms69

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Chomeur

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Quite possibly. s. 149 Equality Act 2010. Have you thought about it?

Comms69

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Quite possibly. s. 149 Equality Act 2010. Have you thought about it?

Yes i have, it's not applicable.

It's not unlawful to pay people differently due to experience. Which is the fundamental point you're alluding to

Chomeur

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Quite possibly. s. 149 Equality Act 2010. Have you thought about it?

Yes i have, it's not applicable.

It's not unlawful to pay people differently due to experience. Which is the fundamental point you're alluding to

No it's not. Being paid to sit at home is not the same as being paid to do a job.

CocoM2020

But they didn’t know when they started their job this would have happened. 

Comms69

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Quite possibly. s. 149 Equality Act 2010. Have you thought about it?

Yes i have, it's not applicable.

It's not unlawful to pay people differently due to experience. Which is the fundamental point you're alluding to

No it's not. Being paid to sit at home is not the same as being paid to do a job.

That's up to the employer to decide. The state has no business in interfering in what work or lack of work is given to private employees. 

I can pay you £9 an hour to haul bricks, and pay someone else £50 an hour to sit on his backside. 

Sharon87

People are who furloughed are NOT unemployed though. The furlough scheme is to prevent employers from sacking people because they can't afford to pay them if they're not open. It's to SAVE jobs not to reward people for working. Furlough is also taxable whilst Universal Credit isn't. 

There have been masses of people left out - including my industry of TV, most jobs are done on short PAYE contracts or as self employed. Some good employers extended people's contracts so they could continue on furlough. I was put on furlough for a few weeks are our production took a break - as they couldn't afford to keep us on and not do anything. 

I think if you start a job and then a month or so later are unable to do it because of local lockdowns - furlough should apply, but employing someone then putting them straight on furlough is basically de-frauding the government - any boss could employ any of their unemployed friends just to furlough them. If you were unemployed already then you may already be claiming benefits. Now whilst I think the benefits system doesn't offer enough that's a different story (the housing benefit cap is way too low in my opinion)

greensalad

Dakta said:

I have a nasty feeling that whilst it might seem unfair working when some people get furlough pay and aren't - in the long run I think the real battle is going to be staying in a job at all.

I've worked all through this period personally, if I had been furloughed I would have been quite conscious of a heightened risk of not returning, which can happen to anyone but I think being put on furlough would make my concerns ever greater. (which is something that happened to a couple of family members).

What I'm trying to say is I've never looked at people on furlough with envy because they don't have to work, because being paid whilst not being productive is a very risky position to be in in a variety of ways.

Thank you so much for this. I was furloughed for 3 months and have dealt with moody comments from my colleagues who weren't about how "lucky" I was to get a "3 month holiday". 
Yes, I didn't have to work for 3 months. It wasn't a "holiday" though really was it? Couldn't go anywhere. Couldn't do anything. I sat in my house for 3 months bored out of my mind, with increasing anxiety about what the future would be for my job and a chunky pay cut that was unexpected (I'm still grateful for the £2,500 pm that we received, of course, but it did put a spanner in the works for my planning and forecasting). Sitting for 3 months with nothing but the anxiety of whether your work will make you redundant or not is not really something to be envied.

lincroft1710

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Comms69 said:

Chomeur said:

Probably not. But it seems hugely unfair. People on furlough are effectively unemployed but are paid £1-2000/month by the government. If you don't have a job to be furloughed from then all you can do is live on savings, or claim benefits of about £400/month once they have gone (and probably then be obliged to spend 35 hours/week looking for work, which you won't find).
Is there a solution to this?

Whoever told you life was fair lied. 

No of course life's not fair. But there are laws that go some way to make it so. Isn't the policy rather ageist? Younger people entering the job market now get £400/month, older people who have had a job get much more. That might be a route to challenge it.
In reality people on furlough are unemployed. The government doesn't want it to look as if they are because the unemployment rate is such a headline figure.

You think age discrimination like this is illegal?

Quite possibly. s. 149 Equality Act 2010. Have you thought about it?

Yes i have, it's not applicable.

It's not unlawful to pay people differently due to experience. Which is the fundamental point you're alluding to

No it's not. Being paid to sit at home is not the same as being paid to do a job.

I can pay you £9 an hour to haul bricks, and pay someone else £50 an hour to sit on his backside. 

I hereby wish to be considered for the £50 ph sit on backside job