Furlough for childcare reasons

[REdReDRE]

I can't find a thread on here already, apologies if there is. Martin Lewis says parents can request to be furloughed even if there is enough work for them but I can't find the source of this and doubt my work would just accept Martin Lewis' video as proof. Has anyone seen any further information? I have still got work but I can't do it as I'm solely responsible for young children and my husband is working all hours as a police officer.

I don't know but my circumstances are same as you as I'd would of have to request to be furloughed due to childcare but they have done it anyway . Can you speak to your employer and explain your reasons ?

I'm in exactly the same boat! Nursery closed yesterday and I work for the NHS so have been told I need to go in even though I'm only admin. I can work from home for a lot of stuff but they've said no.

My husband is a support worker and does 24 hour shifts so I've offered to do 3 hours before he goes to work and 3 hours after but they're still considering it.

I don't have any other options! Have asked about being furloughed but again I'm still waiting on it but I doubt they'll let me. If I hear anything I'll let you know!

@ilovecakeandwine i will give it a go but it's a small company and I'm not sure they'll risk it!

@Roomarmoset Good luck! My work are flexible and I am able to work from home but I just don't have the time to do it! School have said the school age ones can't go as I'm not a key worker and my youngest's pre school is closed. I could pay for a childminder but that would be almost as much as I earn and would be better to take unpaid leave!

My understanding is that furlough is an alternative to redundancy to retain people in employment while they have no work to do. If you have work you can still do to the benefit of the business I can’t see them agreeing particularly if there are others who don’t have work and the work can’t be transferred between you

My reading suggests Furloughing is supposed to only be where that worker would otherwise be made redundant because there is no work for them as a result of covid19 measures
As a parent you can request emergency leave which should be granted but the company do not have to pay this.

@figgygal it relates to this and he backs it up with a video - he's normally pretty reliable but such unclear guidance to back it up.

I don't think my work would mind in principle - they're generally quite good and most of my work could go on hold (I'm setting up new processes and procedures so not imminently critical). My colleagues are generally young and child free so not many (maybe 5/40) with dependent children so they wouldn't lose all their workforce.

We will no doubt lose business from this but not immediately as current work pre dates then crisis and we are adapting to it.

I'm in the same position. Husband is in the police and I'm WFH with our 3 year old son and pregnant. My boss just spoke to me yesterday that they are looking for people to volunteer to go on furlough where it might actually be of benefit. We talked about it for myself and I'm going to go for it. I'm due to take 2 weeks annual leave soon then go straight onto mat leave so will be furloughed for period of around 4/5 weeks, take annual leave, then go on mat. There is still work I could do so it isn't because my role becoming redundant so it seems to me furlough can be applied for childcare reasons.

We’re allowing people to volunteer for furlough where I work because and most people doing so do have young children. I’d speak to your boss.

Can you do flexible hours? For example 7pm until midnight gets 5 hours done when they're in bed. Yes it's exhausting but compromises are needed on all sides. I'm lucky to split childcare throughout the day with my husband, so get about 6 hours done between 6am and 7pm. Then we both log on again after kids in bed.

Martin lewis, seems to have got a few things wrong lately. Especially around furlough.

Furlough, is the alternative to making people redundant. Lots of employers are asking for volunteers or peoples circumstances when choosing who to furlough.

Is anyone else at your work being furloughed?

I would be extremely careful about pointing out that none of your work is critical. The company my husband works for have furloughed lots of staff, but only after the HR director checked that he could then easily make them redundant as soon as the scheme ends.

It's on the government website. There is a full section about it. You are better googling it to find the page direct though as the gov.co.uk website is awful to navigate

Thanks all - my work agreed - my boss has young children and his wife has been furloughed for the same reason. I also asked my MP who confirmed is was also for people in my position.

I still maintain that if you can avoid it you should.
Especially where some colleagues are not being furloughed as when this is over and redundancies are considered employers are much more likely to make those who were furloughed redundant as the whole process means you can cut out much of the usual initial best practice regarding justifying the redundancy.

peoplepleaser1 that is not true. They would still have to go through the usual processes if making people redundant in order to ensure transparency. It may speed up the initial decision making process as some of the criteria used could be similar to that of furlough, but it isn't fair to say those who are furloughed would be the first to go, or conversely that those who are working are safe, it very much depends on the circumstances of the business after this is over. However I agree with your point about avoiding it if possible; no one wants to demonstate to their employer that they could get by without them.

@smileandsing I take your point, but even the advice on the youGov site hints at it in my opinion. The wording is terribly suggestive when clarifying that furlough is no barrier to redundancy.

I know it's not fair and will be abused by employers, but sadly many will be looking to make savings and streamline after all this and most will look to furloughed employees first.

peoplepleaser1 it is terrible that your DH's boss has shared that he has checked this, what an awful thing to tell people at an already difficult time. He has shown his true colours. But the wording is open to interpretation, at least my employer seems to be interpreting it differently.
They have furloughed staff because of a dramatic decrease in demand for services (air travel industry). I got furloughed despite not meeting the criteria they used and being more experienced and qualified than others who do the same job who are still working. The reason they gave was to assist with (perceived) childcare issues They said that if it comes to redundancies they would have to go through the proper processes, and while some of the criteria may be similar to those used for furlough, the people who are furloughed may not be the first to go, which in turn means those still working are not necessarily 'safe'. Pretty sure they can't just get rid of me because they decided I had childcare issues during a crisis.
When things pick up again they will need more people than are currently working, and my role takes years to train and qualify in. I worry for those still training though.

However I would not have volunteered for furlough because of the Government's description of it's use. Anyone who has a job in which they could easily be relaced should definitely not ask to be furloughed in my opinion.

My employer agreed so that's good. My options were be furloughed or go on vastly reduced hours for the duration (and therefore significantly less pay).

My role probably would be among the first to go as it's about improving the ways in which we work - however, I've been there a very long time so I don't think they'd throw me out of the door at the earliest opportunity but I acknowledge it's a risk a lot of us face regardless of being furloughed.