To think furlough rules for charities could be relaxed

[Acis]

Current furlough rules require that people furloughed cannot do anything that will provide services to their employer or make money for them, which is obviously sensible. However, some charities have suggested that the rules could be varied. Many are having all sorts of financial problems and are having to furlough employees; people who work for charities tend to be committed to the aims of the charity and would like to volunteer to ensure that people they help aren't left high and dry. Charities that just can't shut up shop are in an impossible situation if they can't get any assistance with essential employees' salaries, and are potentially looking at having to close down. Government charity funding is limited to what is described as frontline charities, whilst lottery funding is limited to local ones - so small charities that don't restrict their operations locally but aren't deemed frontline can't benefit.

Allowing furloughed charity employees who want to volunteer for their employer to do so seems a relatively easy option, and limitations could be built in to ensure that costs don't spiral. Charities are going to be needed more than ever as we come out of this, with so many people losing their jobs and businesses, so action that enables them to keep going is likely to benefit the country in the long term.

What do people think?

I think the reason furloughed employees cannot work is that otherwise all employers would furlough all employees, and the bill would be enormous. Furloughing is to prevent employees being laid off when there's no work for them.

As I said, I fully understand the reason why the normal rule is that you can't carry on working for your employer whilst furloughed. I don't think it's correct that it's only for people for whom there is no work though - in general the principle behind it is that it is to keep businesses going and help employers avoid having to make people redundant.

The point is that charities might be treated as an exception. It is certainly the case that there is more need than ever for the work of most charities, but as they've had to close down shops and stop most of their normal fundraising activities many are looking at closing down if they have to keep paying salaries. It would be simple enough to build in safeguards, e.g. that only a certain percentage of furloughed employees can continue to volunteer for a charity employer.

If you work for a charity, rather than being furloughed if you want to volunteer why not just be redeployed?

Nothing to stop you taking unpaid leave / pay cut and to continue to work for the charity.

I guess there's nothing to stop someone furloughed from one charity to volunteer for another? So if you are an experienced fundraiser or grief counselor at one hospice you could volunteer for another?

No, if you're working you should not be furloughed, you should be paid for your work.

The furlough is ONLY to stop businesses having to make people redundant because there is temporarily no work for them. It's not a way of the government paying people to do their jobs.

Diana I've heard of charities having that very conversation - volunteer swaps.

the problem is, is demand is up by 48% and income has dropped 42% and charities really dont have the time to spend orgainsing a skill swap arrangement for their staff so they can volunteer in other charities - and yet they will almost certainly end having to do this

But why should the tax payer effectively fund charities in that way? The government is already paying the furlough costs. If there is work to be done, furlough should be lifted and charity employees return to work.

Charity workers are key workers in some aspects my Husband works for the Salvation Army the Corps (officers ) are still working, the SAs homeless shelters, foodbanks, street work is still going one, but DH runs 2 charity shops, he works for the trading arm so is not classed as a charity worker or a key worker, obviously he cannot open his shops to the public either as a paid worker or as a volunteer in fact as he is 71 he cant do anything for them at all at the moment as he is self isolating

He did arrange with the permission of the police for the key workers to go into one of his shops and take clothing for the shelters but I had to be the one to give the keys to the workers and get them back again

Hold on. If you work for a charity just tell them you don't want to be paid and then they won't be taking money from the taxpayer . A charity should not be looking for loopholes.

LastTrainEast my DHs furlough letter makes it clear due to the government's coronavirus job retention scheme he is not permitted to work or volunteer for the trading arm of the SA (his employer) or they would risk losing funding so he its not case of him just saying hey just don't pay me I will work for free he can't

@Oldsu of course he can work for free if the company don’t apply for furlough. He just can’t work there while the government is paying 80% of his wages

HuntIdeas but the company HAS to apply for furlough because if it didn't there would be less money for the work they are still doing, less money for the homeless, less money to feed the poor via foodbanks, less money to help people with drug addictions, less money for the counselling and support services because one of the main sources of their income the charity shops are not trading, not generating money.

If you work for a charity, rather than being furloughed if you want to volunteer why not just be redeployed?

You could only be redeployed to work for another charity, which seems a bit pointless if your heart is in the charity you are normally employed by.

Nothing to stop you taking unpaid leave / pay cut and to continue to work for the charity.

What may stop you taking unpaid leave is the need to pay the mortgage, buy food, little things like that. The same applies to the pay cut - plus that is more disadvantageous to the charity since they can't get anything paid back through the Job Retention Scheme.

No, if you're working you should not be furloughed, you should be paid for your work

Not too helpful if that may mean the charity having to close down because it can't fundraise enough to cover salaries.

But why should the tax payer effectively fund charities in that way?

Because many, if not most are doing extremely valuable work - in many cases, work that really should be done by the government anyway.

If there is work to be done, furlough should be lifted and charity employees return to work

So how can they be paid if the charity has no funds?

Hold on. If you work for a charity just tell them you don't want to be paid and then they won't be taking money from the taxpayer

Sadly shops do want to be paid before they will let us take food away. Likewise people like electricity and gas companies, building societies, landlords etc.

I can see your point OP. I think charities should be considered an exception. They rely largely on grants and donations for their income rather than paying customers. A lot of charities provide an essential public service. Particularly since austerity years and Cameron's push to replace public services with charities (instead of being an additional source of help). There will be so many small charities that do so much good work helping vulnerable people and animals that are struggling now. We should do what we can to support them. I think OP's idea is a good one.

I think you’re getting mixed up with what furlough is. I agree that charities need more funding (I’m pretty sure that they announced some recently), but this should be separate from the furlough scheme

The problem is that the funding made available for charities recently is very limited in scope and the majority of charities are not eligible for it. This would provide a relatively cheap way of helping, and have the major benefit that the charities in question could carry on working to benefit those they normally work with. If it keeps anyone happy to call it something other than furlough, so be it.

I’m not quite sure what you are trying to say?

I work for a charity and I am furloughed, I understand that I cannot do anything for ‘my Charity’ at the moment. I am volunteering for a completely separate project so that is keeping me busy and motivated.

A friend of mine works for a different charity, she has been furloughed but is being strongly encouraged (bullied) to fund raise for her charity, as it neither NHS or Covid related it is clearly quite difficult to fund raise at present and is, in my opinion, clearly against the furlough guidelines.

Where did you get the idea that charities aren’t eligible?

I work for a charity and have a lot of furloughed colleagues.

It wouldn’t make sense for them to volunteer.

Where did I say that I thought they aren't eligible, @millymaple?

Yes, I know that fundraising/doing any work for the charity that employs you is against the guidelines, @Ragwort, that's the whole point. I'm suggesting that the guidelines could be changed or relaxed for charities. If all the employees for charity A volunteer for charity B and vice versa, it would be perfectly legal - but wouldn't it make more sense for them to stick with the charity they already work for, given that they know all its systems etc?

If there is work to be done, furlough should be lifted and charity employees return to work.

There's work but not money.

There are lots of charities, some I agree with and some I don’t. Do I think some public schools should be able to furlough staff and still ask staff to work? Do I think some of the more marmite charities, such as Mermaids should be able to? No.

However, Scope, Age Concern, Meals on Wheels, Food banks, Women’s Aid and Child Poverty charitIes? Yes.

Another person would have a different criteria on who should get more money. Just setting up as a charity does not mean you should get state money.