Council & Agency have colluded not to Furlough me

[northernladuk]

Saying that, its not just contractors who dont get this. Naming no names, I know of a client who thinks they can tell contractors they're not needed for 3 months then they are still obliged to come back if requested. Not me BTW.

Technically the can if the contract is long enough.....

[psychocandy]

You are missing the point, its a contract and they've terminated - they are legally allowed to so.

You are missing the point, the furlough scheme is for employees the employer wishes to retain but has no means to pay (in its simplest form), they don't want to retain you (they might be happy to rehire you later but that's a different beast)

You are missing the point, the furlough scheme is optional and an employer has no obligation to put any employee on it (and they can choose to put some but not other on it)

If you want to throw good money after bad, by all means talk to a solicitor, but after trousering your notes they'll just tell you exactly what we've told you.

Some wise words here.......

Its a contract they can terminate it if they want. They obviously wanted to. You are free to do whatever now. You have no obligation to go back ever. Obviously, they are confident they can call in a few months and pick you back up.

Saying that, its not just contractors who dont get this. Naming no names, I know of a client who thinks they can tell contractors they're not needed for 3 months then they are still obliged to come back if requested. Not me BTW.

[oilboil]

The agency was his employer. They could have put him on furlough - regardless of the client action.

They could have, but it costs them to process payroll and they have other costs like apprentice levy that the furlough doesn't pay. So they'd be paying out of their pockets to allow them to furlough him. It wouldn't be much but if they have lots of people on this type of payment process it would quickly mount up

[NotAllThere]

But they aren't your employer. They are your client.

Not sure what's immoral about them not helping you when they can't.

The agency was his employer. They could have put him on furlough - regardless of the client action.

[northernladuk]

Thanks for the lesson, I realise now we are expendable assets. Live by the sword die by the sword. But if I was a Ltd company I could have put myself on furlough

For 80% of your salary which would be around 700 a month if you were a LTD. Not really a comparison.

The only slight positive here is if you were at a private company through a limited in exactly the same situation its likely you would have been finished quite a bit earlier.

[Mr S T]

Sounds like a classic case of not understand what you are an the relationships involved. If you are a contractor you are not employed and you don't have a manager. I make this point regularly and get slated for my pedantry around terms like manager but if you get it right from the start it stops you falling in to the wrong mindset. You have a client and a client manager.

Being a contractor there is no need to furlough you. They just stop paying you, like people do with all expensive resources they don't need from time to time.

Thanks for the lesson, I realise now we are expendable assets. Live by the sword die by the sword. But if I was a Ltd company I could have put myself on furlough

[northernladuk]

Yes I have talked with Unison and a solicitor and they both say I have no right to tell my employer to furlough me. It does seem immoral though that they cant help their workers out. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth. I guess I will be applying for income based job seekers allowance...

But they aren't your employer. They are your client.

Not sure what's immoral about them not helping you when they can't.

[Mr S T]

This being the most important part, all throughout the country, staff are either being furloughed, being made redundant or kept on...as contractors, nearly all the redundancy rules dont apply to us, I too feel the poster is wasting his time.

Yeah I realise I'm wasting my time now, a hopeless situation...

[Mr S T]

You are missing the point, its a contract and they've terminated - they are legally allowed to so.

You are missing the point, the furlough scheme is for employees the employer wishes to retain but has no means to pay (in its simplest form), they don't want to retain you (they might be happy to rehire you later but that's a different beast)

You are missing the point, the furlough scheme is optional and an employer has no obligation to put any employee on it (and they can choose to put some but not other on it)

If you want to throw good money after bad, by all means talk to a solicitor, but after trousering your notes they'll just tell you exactly what we've told you.

Yes I have talked with Unison and a solicitor and they both say I have no right to tell my employer to furlough me. It does seem immoral though that they cant help their workers out. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth. I guess I will be applying for income based job seekers allowance...

[northernladuk]

Sounds like a classic case of not understand what you are an the relationships involved. If you are a contractor you are not employed and you don't have a manager. I make this point regularly and get slated for my pedantry around terms like manager but if you get it right from the start it stops you falling in to the wrong mindset. You have a client and a client manager.

Being a contractor there is no need to furlough you. They just stop paying you, like people do with all expensive resources they don't need from time to time.