[Crystal-clear]

Question.
Not my situation but I'm purely curious.
As everyone is aware some business owners close some business owners carry on as normal in our industry.

So Example you're choosing to carry on as normal
Staff member is blatantly honest and says he doesn't want to put himself and others at risk
And is delusional that you should pay him 80% for nothing as the government going to pay it.


It wouldn't put it past me if someone on this forum had a similar scenario let us know if so.
How do you think one could realistically handle this?

Because handing off a P45 for being scared of covid 19 could potentially be risky likewise if you have a low balance sheet you generally won't be able to pay in which case it could be a messy conundrum.

[windowswashed]

Any decent employer would rather furlough an employee so they at least get 80percent of their wage rather than receiving a p45 and being forced to sign on with universal credit and virtually nothing overnight.
My sister runs a shop and had to furlough her staff, difficult decision, but when life returns to normal at least she still has her employees instead of stabbing them in the back with P45's.

[Crystal-clear]

Any decent employer would rather furlough an employee so they at least get 80percent of their wage rather than receiving a p45 and being forced to sign on with universal credit and virtually nothing overnight.
My sister runs a shop and had to furlough her staff, difficult decision, but when life returns to normal at least she still has her employees instead of stabbing them in the back with P45's.

Totally agree with that however my ex has just told me she has made redundant recently the company's business came to a halt only 20 staff small in the grand scheme of things yet no offer of the 80% furlough.
I think some employees don't want to risk it in case they do not get the Grant it's not guaranteed.

also in regards to the original question the boss is not wanting to make the staff furlough he wants to continue to work as normal the staff member does not want to work through his choice therefore I don't think that grant is an option.

I wonder how the situation could be handled especially if the company has a low balance sheet

[deeege]

Question.
Not my situation but I'm purely curious.
As everyone is aware some business owners close some business owners carry on as normal in our industry.

So Example you're choosing to carry on as normal
Staff member is blatantly honest and says he doesn't want to put himself and others at risk
And is delusional that you should pay him 80% for nothing as the government going to pay it.


It wouldn't put it past me if someone on this forum had a similar scenario let us know if so.
How do you think one could realistically handle this?

Because handing off a P45 for being scared of covid 19 could potentially be risky likewise if you have a low balance sheet you generally won't be able to pay in which case it could be a messy conundrum.

Why wouldn’t they furlough him? Some people are genuinely very scared of catching this virus, not to mention he could have close family members at home who are high risk.

The government scheme has been set up for situations like this has it not?

[Kev Martin]

Any decent employer would rather furlough an employee so they at least get 80percent of their wage rather than receiving a p45 and being forced to sign on with universal credit and virtually nothing overnight.
My sister runs a shop and had to furlough her staff, difficult decision, but when life returns to normal at least she still has her employees instead of stabbing them in the back with P45's.

Totally agree with that however my ex has just told me she has made redundant recently the company's business came to a halt only 20 staff small in the grand scheme of things yet no offer of the 80% furlough.
I think some employees don't want to risk it in case they do not get the Grant it's not guaranteed.

also in regards to the original question the boss is not wanting to make the staff furlough he wants to continue to work as normal the staff member does not want to work through his choice therefore I don't think that grant is an option.

I wonder how the situation could be handled especially if the company has a low balance sheet

It is very difficult for employers.  I don't think there are a lot of you who are self employed who have grasped what is going on if you are employer or an employee.  To furlough staff at 80% the employer must make up the other 20% or the employer only receives 80% of the so called 80%.  This means in reality that the HMRC and DWP still get their tax and NI up to £2500. 
So let us assume I furlough staff who are for ease we will say £2000 per month.  I will POTENTIALLY get £1600 if I pay them the additional £400 if not I would only get £1280 which is 80% of the 80% so I still need to give them £320 and they will still pay Tax and NI. on the whole £1600 and I will pay employers contributions pro rata.  We have currently lost 98% of Trade Sales for ancillaries and a 100% of machine sales.  However, our on line sales have increased.  So if I furlough all staff that means I contribute 20% for those staff to sit at home and I have no workers.  If I furlough some of them how do you choose?  Or do I go in with my family - (I am currently self isolating by the way) all work our socks off for no wages and pay the staff 20% plus NI and pension to sit at home???

[TomCrowther]

One of my customers is in the same situation. He has three v busy takeaways. 80 odd staff and fifty of them are refusing to work. He has enough willing staff to run one shop.
He hasn’t been told to shut and there is no guarantee he will get cash from the government.  Horrible situation.

[Slacky]

If the employee only recieves 80% of the 80% so be it. Thats life. Its tough for everyone.

Show me someone who is dis-satisfied with that in the current climate.

[simon w]

Depends on the employee situation itself really. There are plenty of employees who'd use ANY opportunity to down tools and throw a spanner in the works for a employers business. So on a personal level if I had a sniff that this was the case, that the employee was using this situation to stay at home sitting on their arse and getting paid I'd be keen to get rid asap. Also if your business is still working and you need that employee carrying out their work then from a practical point of view you need to be hiring someone else to do their job.

If however you know this employee well and they are a good hard working member of your business and you know that their motives are genuine then perhaps consider the furlough root if your business can support this. End of day small businesses can be very fragile so if an employee needs to be sacrificed in order not to go under then I know what direction I'd take.

Sounds harsh but that's life/business. 

[simon w]

One of my customers is in the same situation. He has three v busy takeaways. 80 odd staff and fifty of them are refusing to work. He has enough willing staff to run one shop.
He hasn’t been told to shut and there is no guarantee he will get cash from the government.  Horrible situation.

I wonder how many of those 50 are out doing cash in hand work on the sly because it suits them more than working in a take away?

[Soupy]

If the employee only recieves 80% of the 80% so be it. Thats life. Its tough for everyone.

Show me someone who is dis-satisfied with that in the current climate.

He's wrong. The government is covering the total cost of furlough. Including employer's NI and pensions.

If the employer only got 80% of the 80% nobody would do it. Sad but true.

[Soupy]

[G Griffin]

Question.
Not my situation but I'm purely curious.
As everyone is aware some business owners close some business owners carry on as normal in our industry.

So Example you're choosing to carry on as normal
Staff member is blatantly honest and says he doesn't want to put himself and others at risk
And is delusional that you should pay him 80% for nothing as the government going to pay it.


It wouldn't put it past me if someone on this forum had a similar scenario let us know if so.
How do you think one could realistically handle this?

Because handing off a P45 for being scared of covid 19 could potentially be risky likewise if you have a low balance sheet you generally won't be able to pay in which case it could be a messy conundrum.

It's up to you to pay him. What is he delusional about?
And what is it that he wants for not working?

[DrewHastings]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

[deeege]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

[Soupy]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

Pretty sure Michael Gove said, in an address to the nation, that if you felt you were being sent to work and it was unsafe; you should report your employer to the daily record.

[G Griffin]

It's always a good idea to go to The Daily Record first.

What's your next move, Soupy?

[Soupy]

It's always a good idea to go to The Daily Record first.

What's your next move, Soupy?

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

[andyM]

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

Easter Bank Holiday innit?

[Soupy]

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

Easter Bank Holiday innit?

 

My normal policy is; if you want a bank holiday, get a job in a bank.

[G Griffin]

It's always a good idea to go to The Daily Record first.

What's your next move, Soupy?

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

It'll be interesting to see what 'gov' come out with next.
I can't see what else you can do, really.
Good luck with it.

[Crystal-clear]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Yeah this was what I thought.
It could get messy though who knows.

[Soupy]

It's always a good idea to go to The Daily Record first.

What's your next move, Soupy?

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

It'll be interesting to see what 'gov' come out with next.
I can't see what else you can do, really.
Good luck with it.

This is most unhelpful:



If not Monday then when?

[NWH]

If they are anything like what I’ve employed in the past they will think you should still pay them there wages and when the grant comes through you should give them that as a gesture as well,some will laugh at that but that’s how delusional some people are.

[Missing Link]

It is very difficult for employers.  I don't think there are a lot of you who are self employed who have grasped what is going on if you are employer or an employee.  To furlough staff at 80% the employer must make up the other 20% or the employer only receives 80% of the so called 80%. 

No, this isn't right.

To furlough staff the employer won't end up out of pocket - if they don't want to.  The employer pays the 80% up front and then claims it back from the government (gov is just getting it's admin together).

There is no LEGAL requirement to top the wages up to the 100%, but government has asked (asked, not forced) employers to do so and there is no legal requirement for employers to do so either.

So the employer is not out of pocket.

Wor Little Un has been furloughed and her employer is topping it up to the 100%.  But he doesn't have to.

[Missing Link]

If not Monday then when?

Gawd knows.  I expect peak deaths around Monday.  Part of me thinks that when we get peak deaths it would be difficult for the government to relax the lock down even if it was safe to do so.

People - in general - aren't the smartest and won't understand why the government is relaxing the lock down during a peak death period.

You can just imagine the wibbling and hysteria.

Two weeks after that I'd guess, so towards the end of April, when the death rates have really dropped.

[DrewHastings]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

Why good luck? It's the law, and its how things are, regardless of the virus.

A lot of laws and rules have been relaxed, but it's not a national paid holiday for everyone. If someone is refusing to go to work 'just because', then they don't get paid. No arguments, no luck required, and they won't have leg to stand on in any tribunal.

[G Griffin]

It's always a good idea to go to The Daily Record first.

What's your next move, Soupy?

Don't know. I'm going to phone every employee on Friday, see what they say and take it from there. I've bought masks and sanitiser and got all the vehicles prepared and ready to roll but I doubt we'll be out on Monday.

It'll be interesting to see what 'gov' come out with next.
I can't see what else you can do, really.
Good luck with it.

This is most unhelpful:



If not Monday then when?

Why can't Raab C Nesbitt do it?
Oh, I've just realised- there are claims of a power vacuum at the heart of government.

[Dry Clean]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

If a factory near to me with 1000 plus employees can do it then I don't think he will have a problem with it, Drew is spot on in what he has said and there are plenty of factory workers and so forth very angry because of it.

[Kev Martin]

If the employee only recieves 80% of the 80% so be it. Thats life. Its tough for everyone.

Show me someone who is dis-satisfied with that in the current climate.

He's wrong. The government is covering the total cost of furlough. Including employer's NI and pensions.

If the employer only got 80% of the 80% nobody would do it. Sad but true.

In my opinion I am not wrong and my accountant whom I have used and trusted for 25 Years agrees with me.  Where does it say that the government are going to cover the employers Tax, NI & Pension contributions?  They will only cover what they pay the employer covers the rest.
My issue is if I furlough any employees they cannot work for ME during that period.

[Missing Link]

In my opinion I am not wrong and my accountant whom I have used and trusted for 25 Years agrees with me.  Where does it say that the government are going to cover the employers Tax, NI & Pension contributions?  They will only cover what they pay the employer covers the rest.
My issue is if I furlough any employees they cannot work for ME during that period.

You need to get a better accountant, Kev.  It's right on the first page of the regs.



https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

That'll be a fiver, mate.

[Missing Link]

My issue is if I furlough any employees they cannot work for ME during that period.

Spot on.  No-one's saying you should furlough them.

[deeege]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

Why good luck? It's the law, and its how things are, regardless of the virus.

A lot of laws and rules have been relaxed, but it's not a national paid holiday for everyone. If someone is refusing to go to work 'just because', then they don't get paid. No arguments, no luck required, and they won't have leg to stand on in any tribunal.

What kind of productivity do you think you will get from that employee who is genuinely scared to catch the virus or pass it onto his family who are high risk? 50%? 80%? 100%?

Not to mention it would be a PR disaster for your business should he decide to go down that channel.

It’s the law though so sod ‘em.

Again, good luck with it.

[Dry Clean]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

Why good luck? It's the law, and its how things are, regardless of the virus.

A lot of laws and rules have been relaxed, but it's not a national paid holiday for everyone. If someone is refusing to go to work 'just because', then they don't get paid. No arguments, no luck required, and they won't have leg to stand on in any tribunal.

Exactly the only difference is under normal circumstances you could be sacked.

[Dry Clean]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

Good luck with that.

Why good luck? It's the law, and its how things are, regardless of the virus.

A lot of laws and rules have been relaxed, but it's not a national paid holiday for everyone. If someone is refusing to go to work 'just because', then they don't get paid. No arguments, no luck required, and they won't have leg to stand on in any tribunal.

What kind of productivity do you think you will get from that employee who is genuinely scared to catch the virus or pass it onto his family who are high risk? 50%? 80%? 100%?

Not to mention it would be a PR disaster for your business should he decide to go down that channel.

It’s the law though so sod ‘em.

Again, good luck with it.

If somebody in your family is at high risk and you live with them then you can stay at home with statutory sick pay, a friend/neighbour of mine who works in a non essential factory and has a high risk family member is doing this as we speak.
Its a bloody disgrace and one of many for people still working in non essential businesses that are still open.

[CleanClear]

Question.
Not my situation but I'm purely curious.
As everyone is aware some business owners close some business owners carry on as normal in our industry.

So Example you're choosing to carry on as normal
Staff member is blatantly honest and says he doesn't want to put himself and others at risk
And is delusional that you should pay him 80% for nothing as the government going to pay it.


It wouldn't put it past me if someone on this forum had a similar scenario let us know if so.
How do you think one could realistically handle this?

Because handing off a P45 for being scared of covid 19 could potentially be risky likewise if you have a low balance sheet you generally won't be able to pay in which case it could be a messy conundrum.

I thought this was easy. With a good employer / employee relationship the employer would pay him to be off and then get recompensed by the gov. If no cash flow exists to pay the employee now, then explain they have to wait for the money like everyone else. With a bad employer / employee relationship then just make them redundant.

[Dry Clean]

Question.
Not my situation but I'm purely curious.
As everyone is aware some business owners close some business owners carry on as normal in our industry.

So Example you're choosing to carry on as normal
Staff member is blatantly honest and says he doesn't want to put himself and others at risk
And is delusional that you should pay him 80% for nothing as the government going to pay it.


It wouldn't put it past me if someone on this forum had a similar scenario let us know if so.
How do you think one could realistically handle this?

Because handing off a P45 for being scared of covid 19 could potentially be risky likewise if you have a low balance sheet you generally won't be able to pay in which case it could be a messy conundrum.

I thought this was easy. With a good employer / employee relationship the employer would pay him to be off and then get recompensed by the gov. If no cash flow exists to pay the employee now, then explain they have to wait for the money like everyone else. With a bad employer / employee relationship then just make them redundant.

Why would an employer who has decided to stay open then make it easy for their employees to stay at home ? have you ever worked for anybody Clean ? to most employers especially the larger ones you're nothing more than a number.

[AuRavelling79]

This very subject is up on Radio 2 with Jeremy Vine this lunchtime.
About 1.00 / 1.30 is when this subject starts I think.

[CleanClear]

Why would an employer who has decided to stay open then make it easy for their employees to stay at home ?

Because us and the rest of the World are in the midst of a pandemic ?

[Slacky]

Jeepers....

[Soupy]

If the employee only recieves 80% of the 80% so be it. Thats life. Its tough for everyone.

Show me someone who is dis-satisfied with that in the current climate.

He's wrong. The government is covering the total cost of furlough. Including employer's NI and pensions.

If the employer only got 80% of the 80% nobody would do it. Sad but true.

In my opinion I am not wrong and my accountant whom I have used and trusted for 25 Years agrees with me.  Where does it say that the government are going to cover the employers Tax, NI & Pension contributions?  They will only cover what they pay the employer covers the rest.
My issue is if I furlough any employees they cannot work for ME during that period.

As Tosh said. Sack your accountant asap.

The government has even said companies can re-hire employees who they've make redundant and furlough them. Who in their right mind would do that if it's going to cost them money?





It's pretty clear. Let's say one of my employees earns £40k, 80% of that is over the £2500 p/m limit. It says in black and white that you MUST PAY the employee ALL OF THE GRANT, which would be..... drum roll.... you guessed it £2500.

[Smudger]

Its up to the employer to furlough, not the employee.

If the employee is in an at risk group, then the employer should make amendments or furlough (but doesn't have to).

If the employee is refusing to work, then the employer is well within his rights to not pay them, and place them onto non-paid holiday.

If the business is able to continue, and the employee cannot work from home, then the employee does not have a leg to stand on.

This is spot on

If the employer will not furlough the employee has to continue working if they wish to be paid - they can, due to the pandemic stay at home - but this will be unpaid - you are NOT allowed to sack them though  - however redundancy due to lack of work is another matter

It all comes down to the employer - some are more “understanding” than others

As a side note I had an ex worker ring me - he left several months ago to go self employed labouring and now doesn’t qualify for anything - he wanted me to re-employ and back date to feb 27th - I may be understanding but I can’t do fraud

Darran

[Shrek]

If not Monday then when?

Gawd knows.  I expect peak deaths around Monday.  Part of me thinks that when we get peak deaths it would be difficult for the government to relax the lock down even if it was safe to do so.

People - in general - aren't the smartest and won't understand why the government is relaxing the lock down during a peak death period.

You can just imagine the wibbling and hysteria.

Two weeks after that I'd guess, so towards the end of April, when the death rates have really dropped.

The 76-day Wuhan lockdown has officially been lifted.

This was the epicentre of the virus and now life is returning to normal.

It may be hard to imagine now, but the same will happen to us- we all just need to sit tight and we will get through this.

[Soupy]

If not Monday then when?

Gawd knows.  I expect peak deaths around Monday.  Part of me thinks that when we get peak deaths it would be difficult for the government to relax the lock down even if it was safe to do so.

People - in general - aren't the smartest and won't understand why the government is relaxing the lock down during a peak death period.

You can just imagine the wibbling and hysteria.

Two weeks after that I'd guess, so towards the end of April, when the death rates have really dropped.

Yes but ol' Dominic Dover hasn't even said what's happening next, all we got was "not this Monday" which is unhelpful for people trying to make a decision. "Delayed for a week" or something like that would have been better.

[G Griffin]

I've just been told by our neighbour- she's a matron in infection control not Sharon off of Facebook- that we have not yet the reached the peak and they have been told to expect a thousand deaths a day in the coming days/weeks.
She also said that the temporary hospital at our local one would only be ready in early May.
Make of that what you will.

Added: Lockdown to be extended in Wales.
It'll be the same for the rest of us.

[Dave Willis]

As an employer would you not have a duty of care?
I’m not an employer, so haven’t a clue what I’m talking about.
However, I’d have thought an employee would have a good case against his employer for sending him to work in an unsafe environment.

[Crystal-clear]

This very subject is up on Radio 2 with Jeremy Vine this lunchtime.
About 1.00 / 1.30 is when this subject starts I think.

Is it! blimey well looks like we're gona sus it out before them it all just came to my head the other day my mrs works in a bank and she hasn't been furloughed but doesn't want to work due to the risk! Then it hit me with us lot.

[david mark]

Wuham open most of the world
Closed for business. Because of them we all are suffering .

[Stoots]

Not read the thread but if an employee refuses to work (and he's not claiming he's sick) then you are well within your rights to sack him for breach of contract.

Being "scared of covid" isn't an excuse.

As long as you are putting the proper  safe working practices in place then he should work if he is told to.

[CleanClear]

Wuham open most of the world
Closed for business. Because of them we all are suffering .

In early March, Beijing sent masks, respirators and specialist doctors to Italy. This came at a time when the European Union and its members were largely ignoring Rome’s calls for help.

We did nothing, for them nor ourselves ?

[Missing Link]

Yes but ol' Dominic Dover hasn't even said what's happening next, all we got was "not this Monday" which is unhelpful for people trying to make a decision. "Delayed for a week" or something like that would have been better.

I agree.

[Smudger]

Not read the thread but if an employee refuses to work (and he's not claiming he's sick) then you are well within your rights to sack him for breach of contract.

Being "scared of covid" isn't an excuse.

As long as you are putting the proper  safe working practices in place then he should work if he is told to.

Under normal circumstances yes - but not for this - this is exceptional conditions

Yes there is a duty of care - thats one reason why our staff are furloughed the other is their respective partners and family members either work NHS or care homes and I personally wouldn't like to think I sent my guys out to get a few quid, pick up the virus and it then spread through the care home knocking off 20 or 30 old biddies - thats not a responsibility I want.

Darran

[KS Cleaning]

My accountant has been informed by HMRC that the portals for claiming funding for furloughed wages  will be launched on the 20th April.

[Richard iSparkle]

Not read the thread but if an employee refuses to work (and he's not claiming he's sick) then you are well within your rights to sack him for breach of contract.

Being "scared of covid" isn't an excuse.

As long as you are putting the proper  safe working practices in place then he should work if he is told to.

you're right. its an HR issue really.

you communicate what you expect from your staff

you go from advice from government about what is safe working and show how you are achieving this.

if you cant agree to furlough them because you need them to work then its up to them to turn in for work.

if they dont turn in they need to communicate why they aren't. if they aren't sick its unauthorised leave so you let them know they are absent with unauthorised leave, and then you may give them a another chance, and eventually you sack them or they will most likely just resign.

obviously as far as you are able to, a good employer will try to work out a solution that works for both of you. but if you cant afford to keep them on furlough, and they will not work, they have resigned

[Missing Link]

As an employer would you not have a duty of care?

Of course; which is why employers should be implementing government guidance.

Social distancing measures and the other stuff.

Government hasn't written a fablon sick chit for the whole nation.

[Shrek]

My accountant has been informed by HMRC that the portals for claiming funding for furloughed wages  will be launched on the 20th April.

I emailed my accountant and asked him to furlough my Mrs , said he will sort it out no problem. We’ll get some money eventually 

[Ooooooog]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

[Soupy]

Yes but ol' Dominic Dover hasn't even said what's happening next, all we got was "not this Monday" which is unhelpful for people trying to make a decision. "Delayed for a week" or something like that would have been better.

I agree.

 

[Smudger]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

So which in your book would take priority H&S for staff or turning a profit ?

Darran

[G Griffin]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable.

You gotta earn a crust; get the dough in.

[Richard iSparkle]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

So which in your book would take priority H&S for staff or turning a profit ?

Darran

to be fair both are important.

looking after H&S is clearly important.

but also keeping the business profitable is important. if you go out of business all your employees loose their livelihoods

so you have to manage H&S to reduce risk to acceptable levels.

[CleanClear]

if you go out of business all your employees loose their livelihoods

And if your employees don't come in, you loose yours.

[dazmond]

if an employee hasnt got an underlying health problem and isnt looking after his disabled grandma,etc he should be working(one man,one van).......sack him if he wont come in.....ruddy snowflake generation!

another thing....why do farmers have to employ mainly foreign workers to pick their vegetables?its farcical.......why cant the uk workforce do the jobs (like we did in the 80s?)lots of food will be wasted this summer......

people need to man up.......YOUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU!!

[Crystal-clear]

Not read the thread but if an employee refuses to work (and he's not claiming he's sick) then you are well within your rights to sack him for breach of contract.

Being "scared of covid" isn't an excuse.

As long as you are putting the proper  safe working practices in place then he should work if he is told to.

Under normal circumstances yes - but not for this - this is exceptional conditions

Yes there is a duty of care - thats one reason why our staff are furloughed the other is their respective partners and family members either work NHS or care homes and I personally wouldn't like to think I sent my guys out to get a few quid, pick up the virus and it then spread through the care home knocking off 20 or 30 old biddies - thats not a responsibility I want.

Darran

It's amazing that you've chosen to do that my only worry would be that the government for some reason don't give you the grant because we've not specifically been told to close.
Because at the moment you need to pay everyone and then apply.
I do genuinely hope you get it but is there any part of you that's 50-50?  Whether you've got the balance sheet to sustain 3 or 4 months of 80% wages and no income is irrelevant people who make a lot of money tend to keep wanting a lot more money. There's some people out there that are not impacted and blatantly going to apply for grants and furlough so respect for your decision

[Ooooooog]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

So which in your book would take priority H&S for staff or turning a profit ?

Darran

They are both critical.

[Ascjim]

The idea of the 80% paid by the government is if you cannot trade due to the virus. We have stopped because work has run dry, but if you have a round then you should carry on.

If you have explained to him that he won't come in contact with anyone, then he obviously wants a free holiday.

Explain if he doesn't come in then disciplinary action will be taken.

When your the boss you have to make these kinds of decisions and be the nasty one. Most people don't want that responsibility.

[Smudger]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

So which in your book would take priority H&S for staff or turning a profit ?

Darran

They are both critical.

Wrong - H&S will always outweigh “profit”

CC -  will the gov. Pay, who knows but I think odds are they will, and as stated previously the well being of staff + families are my first priority - I’m not going over the hundreds of posts on this but the overwhelming message is STAY HOME - we have commercial works so are hit by the virus, I could put the guys on short time but how’s that fair to them ? Furloughed will mean they get 80 % of their wages

Darran

[Missing Link]

I've a mate in the local running club whining on faceache because he's a civil servant and he still has to travel to work, even though he says the work he does in non-essential.  He can't work from home because they use a secure computer network.

He's just jealous he's not sat at home on full pay.

[Ooooooog]

As an employer, apart from the health and safety aspect, your roll is to make sure the company is profitable. Or there’s no jobs for anyone.

So which in your book would take priority H&S for staff or turning a profit ?

Darran

They are both critical.

Wrong - H&S will always outweigh “profit”

CC -  will the gov. Pay, who knows but I think odds are they will, and as stated previously the well being of staff + families are my first priority - I’m not going over the hundreds of posts on this but the overwhelming message is STAY HOME - we have commercial works so are hit by the virus, I could put the guys on short time but how’s that fair to them ? Furloughed will mean they get 80 % of their wages

Darran

Wrong.

No profit, no company, no jobs.

I’ve furloughed everyone. However, I’m out working again.

There’s rent, public liability, employers liability, plant insurance, accountant fees, banking fees, van insurances, van taxes, phone contracts, web hosting, retained HS consultant fees (ironic?) etc.,......there’s loads more.

Do you

[Smudger]

Do I what?

Staff - furloughed - if you rent a unit you will get a 10k grant

Yes there are other bills to cover but vat has been moved, some insurance frozen, my wages will be at 80% as per the staff - on the plus side no fuel is being used - so what your saying I things are so tight I your business that it can’t afford to be shut down, even with a grant and your staffs wages covered ?

My point regarding H&S is simple - should for example a worker fell off a roof while cleaning it’s not an excuse to say well your honour my guy had to climb on the roof because there was no profit in me hiring the correct safety equipment 

We all need to make money, however that has to be done secondary to the safety of your staff, when your self employed our quite entitled to  take “risks”

Darran

[Ooooooog]

Do I what?

Staff - furloughed - if you rent a unit you will get a 10k grant



Darran

We don’t qualify for the grant.

[Ooooooog]

Normal working at heights rams apply.  Not sure why you used that comparison.
We pay a months wages next week. Hopefully the government will come good on the 80%......

[Smudger]

I used that because this was the argument several years ago, you wouldn’t think twice now about making sure your staff were safe, the virus is the same, sending them out door to door for non essential work IS putting profit ahead of h&s

Are you sub letting ?

Darran

[Slacky]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

[Ooooooog]

I used that because this was the argument several years ago, you wouldn’t think twice now about making sure your staff were safe, the virus is the same, sending them out door to door for non essential work IS putting profit ahead of h&s

Are you sub letting ?

Darran

We rent a unit off a local farmer. VAT is paid on the unit. Seems we’re excluded from any state aid.
Plenty of work coming in though.

[DrewHastings]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

I know a delivery driver who works as a drayman. He works for one of the national delivery companies, and has a 'mate' to help unload etc.
The mate now has to travel in a car, following the lorry, and is no longer allowed in the cab.

[Missing Link]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

They might be gay lovers who live in the same household and work together too?

It's the 21st Century.

[Lee Pryor]

I would sack the person refusing to work and give the job to someone who has just lost everything through no fault of their own. There's plenty of them out there. People are queuing up for jobs.

[dazmond]

I would sack the person refusing to work and give the job to someone who has just lost everything through no fault of their own. There's plenty of them out there. People are queuing up for jobs.

i agree.....some people need to man up IMO.........

[Simon Trapani]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

Could have been me - I had my 15 year old son with me today. We live in the same household.

[CleanClear]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

I know a delivery driver who works as a drayman. He works for one of the national delivery companies, and has a 'mate' to help unload etc.
The mate now has to travel in a car, following the lorry, and is no longer allowed in the cab.

You mentioned "drayman", there no pubs open ?

[CleanClear]

I would sack the person refusing to work and give the job to someone who has just lost everything through no fault of their own. There's plenty of them out there. People are queuing up for jobs.

Never expected anything less from you.

[CleanClear]

I would sack the person refusing to work and give the job to someone who has just lost everything through no fault of their own. There's plenty of them out there. People are queuing up for jobs.

i agree.....some people need to man up IMO.........

Lets see how this pans out for you both 

[Ascjim]

Some of you on here are so scared of employees saying stuff like 'you won't have a leg to stand on' etc.  If you follow the rules then you won't have a problem.

You are allowed to sack people you know, you won't be locked away lol.

I guess it's pretty scary when you don't employ.

[DrewHastings]

I saw a window cleaning van today, two guys in it.

Not really social distancing is it.

I know a delivery driver who works as a drayman. He works for one of the national delivery companies, and has a 'mate' to help unload etc.
The mate now has to travel in a car, following the lorry, and is no longer allowed in the cab.

You mentioned "drayman", there no pubs open ?

Correct. Should have explained better. Normally Drayman, but works for a big national logistic company, so has been 'repurposed'. 

[CleanClear]

I guess it's pretty scary when you don't employee.

Yeah mate, i know exactly what you mean.