Coronavirus- can nanny still work?

Sorry, covered above! What’s people’s views on this? Anyone now decided to risk furlough who was before not going to?

Has everyone seen the 15th April updates? Apparently nanny does not need to be “redundant” to be furloughed. It seems anyone can be furloughed even if they just don’t fancy working due to Corona, no other reason required it seems. Whilst I find this absolutely astounding, it may be welcomed by those worrying about whether theirs was a furlough/redundancy scenario and asking if they fell under the scheme. Seem too good to be true?

We will have given our nanny six weeks off but in May we have asked her to come back and she has agreed. I have asked her if she feels uncomfortable and she said she is ok about it. We haven’t formally furloughed because she isn’t redundant (she is very much needed). We will all still be careful. She isn’t in a high risk category and doesn’t take public transport to get to us. I think lockdown restrictions will start to relax anyway in May.

@childcarehelp if it makes you feel any better. I haven’t furlough my nanny and won’t do. None of us in a high risk category Mx we do pick her up each day so big in public transport and we don’t mix households.

If she wants to not work then of course then can but we will be replacing. Will find it really sad but ultimately I need a nanny.

There’s presently only another 6 weeks or so that furlough is likely to apply anyway. After that @Childcarehelp the difficult conversations and bad feelings Inevitably ensue. For those not taking a risk on furlough those conversations are happening now. I can see both sides of the debate on that but at the end of the day, how many individuals can struggle on trying to do their job and nanny’s job whilst paying for the privilege while nanny sits at home? It’s going to be a case of coming to some agreement or P45. Sad And stressful on both sides.

Thanks everyone, really interesting. We do need clarification; until then nanny employers are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

We are really struggling to manage without our nanny and yet we’re being expected to do our own jobs and the nanny’s and keep paying her and apparently not be reimbursed.

I think without further clarity on furlough, nanny employers will start asking their nannies to return to work, with all the ensuing tension and potential bad-feeing given the amount of misinformation out there about whether nannies can work or not.

Interestingly @Alwaysinahurrynow, David Reade QC of Littleton goes much further and says "Paragraph 6.1 of the Direction defines a “furloughed employee”. An employee qualifies if furlough occurs “by reason of circumstances arising as a result of coronavirus or coronavirus disease.” Although the Guidance progressively moved away from a need for an underlying redundancy situation, or threatened redundancy, Indeed, the definition is now so broad as to encompass, for example, the employee who refuses to attend work the Direction now puts the matter beyond doubt.due to fears over their health and safety. If the employer elects to furlough the employee, it would seem they would be eligible to claim the employee’s wage costs recoverable under the Scheme".

It's obviously still just one lawyer's opinion, and the rules may again evolve but it's rare for barristers to be quite so unequivocal. login.cmadvantage.co.uk/mvcs1/ImageGallery/LITTLETON%20CHAMBERS/The%20Treasury%20Direction%202.2.pdf

If you read the small print in section 3.3, their long response says that more guidance is required, see also section 8 and the disclaimer at the bottom. No help whatsoever unfortunately other than confirming the need for additional clarity.

4 leading employment barristers have clubbed together to provide a written opinion on the furlough scheme (this virtually never happens - they all work for different chambers and would never normally collaborate in this way). Interestingly @strictlymummy2019 they take the view that to be eligible for the job retention policy there is NO requirement that the parents no longer need a nanny/that s/he would otherwise have been made redundant. See 3.3 on p7
www.dropbox.com/s/c7fn0yft86cw2j0/4%20Silks%20CJRS%20Collaborative%20View.pdf?dl=0

This is not fact but my opinion, I don't think they would deny nanny employers the furlough money for following the 2 metre rules. Yes- we can still work and only have to follow the 2 metre rule where possible. But I just can't see them penalizing nanny employers who choose to follow that rule. It would be wrong.

It does apply to nanny employers but only IF there is no need for the nanny/no work/as an alternative to redundancy. If that’s not so, then the scheme does not apply. Its not there to pay people who can legally work, have work there to do, but would rather not work (for perfectly valid personal reasons) and still want to be paid.

The Government have now clarified that individual employers receiving furlough payments will not be taxed on them. Not surprising as it makes logical sense but always good to have confirmation!

@Florencemattell thank you, yes that makes sense

@Littlemissweepy
Furlough can apply to someone in the shielding group, or some one they live with. Not if they are off because they are sick.
It’s in the government advice:
www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

@littlemiss I’m WFH with husband trying to do the same. Both doing around half our usual hours and struggling! Nanny desperately needed (hasn’t been on for weeks) and definitely NOT redundant!

I’m single but even if I wasn’t and there was a co-parent was also working from home full time, can’t imagine that would make my nanny’s role redundant either.

@florencne “workers can asked to be furloughed on health reasons”. Can they? In what circumstances? Wouldn’t that be sick leave?

I haven’t furloughed my nanny as we don’t fulfill the criteria - her job isn’t redundant as I can’t do my full time job from home and look after and homeschool a 6 and 8 year old.

Those screen shots above about tradespeople are not applicable to a nanny scenario.

Family in our house I should say

Yes I agree with the posts above. We don’t socially mix outside our family etc.

I am starting to have a dilemma with food shopping though, I was getting it delivered but saw an article which encouraged on line slots to be for the vulnerable. It increases the risk doing in person/plus you have to go more times but then I am a much lower risk than a 80 year old. The cost of a local shop is so much higher!!

I agree too @Florencemattell.
When I next speak to my nanny about stopping furlough I will reassure her that we have been fully compliant with social distancing. We’ve gone to the shop for milk but it was empty (except for shop worker who was behind a screen) and everything else has been delivered.

Our nanny is not high risk, and she hasn’t mentioned her partner is either, so the risk of her coming into the house and vice versa seems low.
We have plenty of hand wash or soap. No gloves but I actually understood gloves were no use unless you change them regularly or wash them.... main use is in hospitals to stop a health worker inadvertently spreading it to a patient.
It is frustrating to hear other families have been socialising, as I think it makes all nannies concerned.

@Florencemattell completely agree.

The trust between nanny and employer is really important and if the risk is minimised as much as possible (eg combine supermarket trips/share food to save trips out) and if both households are "closed" (no key worker parent at the front line, strict following of social distancing) with no vulnerable household member, then the increased risk of a nanny continuing to work is very slight in my view.

This thread seems to have brought out the worse in people , both nannies and employers.
The law is clear nannies can work. You can leave the house to go to work if the job can not be done at home.
The parents do not have to be key workers. We need parents to work to support the economy.
I’m a nanny and am happy to go to work. The risk I feel is less than going to the supermarket.
However I have nanny friends who are not happy to work. One has medical conditions that make her vulnerable. Workers can ask to be furloughed for health reasons.
Another nanny is not happy to return as her family have not been observing social distancing rules, the children have been playing with the children from several local families and grandparents have visited.

Employers do have a responsibility to provide a safe working environment.
This has to be reasonable and I don’t personally think the 2m rule is possible in a home situation. But maybe providing gloves and aprons could be possible for dealing with babies/toddlers.
But most of all if you are mixing households, both the nanny and the employers must observe the social distancing rules when exercising and shopping.