What happens if you refuse to go back after furlough?

[Daffodil101]

Just idle Sunday morning musing, really.

Doesn’t apply to me, but two friends in two days have said that their employer wants them back and they aren’t going.

One is an estate agent - manager asked her to start back this week, she’s said no. The other works in a nail salon, meeting with manager suggests he is looking to open early July. She wants to wait until October.

Both furloughed on 80% though I think the nail bar owner is actually making up the other 20%. Where would you stand if you said no to going back? Could they ask you to pay back your furlough or would they keep you on at 80% until October?

It's alright saying it's not their problem but what do you suggest sacking every woman with children?

Certainly not. They can also sack men with children. Why is it the women who have to be the ones, and why do employers have to make adjustments only for women?

In the end, it may not be palatable, and it may not be what anyone (including employers) wants, but in the end employers provide jobs for people to do. Not jobs for people to do if they don't have anything better to do. It's a shitty situation, but the lack of appropriate and flexible childcare, now or at any other time, is not the employers concern.

@TrustTheGeneGenie then the individual takes a combination of annual leave and unpaid parental leave (upto four weeks leave per child per year).

They can work with the employer to come up with a solution - ie different shifts, extended unpaid leave etc - until schools have reopened.

If both parents are involved in the child’s life, then both parents should be working with their employers for a solution, not just mothers.

Once schools have reopened, it comes down to choice rather than necessity. Employers equally have the right to choose who to keep employed.

Can't believe I read the word "simples" on a post in big 2020. Wow.

Certainly not. They can also sack men with children. Why is it the women who have to be the ones, and why do employers have to make adjustments only for women? Because realistically most women earn less and as a household make the decision to sacrifice the lowest wage. If men generally earnt less yes it would be men getting sacked. But it won't be.

In the end, it may not be palatable, and it may not be what anyone (including employers) wants, but in the end employers provide jobs for people to do. Not jobs for people to do if they don't have anything better to do. It's a shitty situation, but the lack of appropriate and flexible childcare, now or at any other time, is not the employers concern

Ffs it's not about having "anything better to do" - the government has taken away our childcare and now our income. Brilliant. Really fucking fair.

Lack of appropriate childcare because it has been banned by the government not because we didn't sort it out.

We can't all afford to take unpaid leave. We're essentially being punished for having children.

Once schools have reopened, it comes down to choice rather than necessity. Employers equally have the right to choose who to keep employed

I agree with that but if it's going to be the patchy couple of hours provision that teachers claim it will be it's not going to be a great deal of help to anyone is it?

For those with childcare issues they can ASK to be furloughed but the employer does not have to do this. It might work for some jobs it might not. For example I can't furlough any cleaners but I might be able to furlough front of house staff provided another employee wants overtime. If i can't get anyone to work overtime.ei can't furlough

So these two friends are in different situations. Estate agent in her fifties, youngest at university. Both she and her husband are furloughed.

Nail lady - husband key Worker children in yR/Y1. Kids allowed to go to school currently, but not going. She’s unsure if she will send them on June 1st. Doesn’t need the money desperately. But a definite feeling that she will have a job to go back to. The nail bar does other beauty stuff and she’s qualified in more things than other staff.

We are keeping the shielded on furlough unless they can work from home. Those with childcare issues who can't work from home we are trying to organise flexible working if that's not possible we will keep them on furlough until the schools return. Those who are refusing and don't have a valid reason will be subject to disciplinary proceedings and will most likely be dismissed.

I think our experiences of what schools and teachers are willing to provide are different. I’ve certainly not seen any teachers claim to only provide a couple of hours provision.

I’m sorry you feel like you are being punished for having children. I equally feel punished for not yet having children, and having to work 50+ hour weeks for the same pay, while in my first trimester, to cover work for people who do have children.

I have sympathy currently - we all have to do what we can - but that sympathy will not extend past June 1st if my colleagues choose not to send their children back to school.

I do have dc but reading this not sure I’d feel happy about being subject to such a difference in treatment.

Those with childcare issues who can't work from home we are trying to organise flexible working if that's not possible we will keep them on furlough until the schools return. Those who are refusing and don't have a valid reason will be subject to disciplinary proceedings and will most likely be dismissed.

I didn't think staff could be furloughed if there was work to be done
We will bring staff back gradually as hopefully the business picks up
Lack of childcare will be a factor as to who can stay off but as pp said wiithin reason eg both parents taking their share
For people not wanting to leave their 14 year old that s not going to cut it
Once furlough stops (or possibly even once we have to contribute) then if work is slow there will have to be redundancies

User - employees with children and no childcare can be furloughed, even if the work is there for them to do.

The government will be expecting businesses to open up in line with their direction, so estate agents from 1st June and my guess is furlough pay will then stop. So then it’s up to the estate agents owner to decide if they can work from home or not. If not and they won’t go into work my guess is they will lose their job. Same for the nail person when it reopens

I suspect that employers will not be allowed to employ new staff whilst claiming furlough. So employer would have to dismiss them?.

Ok that will help people

They'll lose their jobs. Employers can't open without staff

Far too many people are using this situation to take an extended holiday they are both being ridiculous

Furlough is for people whose businesses are either closed or who haven't enough work. It isn't for folk with child care issues or who want a break till October.

@MarshaBradyo.

Why are you uncomfortable with this Marsha?

We know that schools aren't open yet. We know that people can't rely on relatives for childcare. If an employee states that they want to come back to work but can't because they have no childcare available for their 5 year old, we know that it's not their fault and we know that schools will most likely reopen soon. It would be unreasonable to dismiss them right now.

If someone says they don't want to come back because they want to remain on furlough but have no valid reason for refusing to work. Well of course they have to accept that there will be consequences.

@Viviennemary from the gov.uk info for employers on who can be furloughed.

Those with current childcare issues due to schools and nurseries not being open, can be furloughed.

So one doesn't have school age children and one does but husband is KW so does have childcare?. In that case both out of a job.

Far too many people are using this situation to take an extended holiday they are both being ridiculous

So many people are absolutely loving every minute of this. It makes me sick.

Greek I’m ok with the idea that if you would like to be furloughed you can request it. I’d then want the employer to consider this if they need to furlough staff.

I’d expect the furlough to be based on work not needed rather than childcare concerns.

I'm not sure I understand the question @ Tarscout.

Then they take unpaid leave or face dismissal
They can’t just refuse to work