Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Friend said DH is abusing furlough

662 replies

amy198820 · 28/12/2020 17:09

DH been on furlough from 2 jobs since March (one full time job and one part time job he does one evening a week). He has been back to work on and off since the summer and is now on the flexi furlough scheme and both jobs have topped his pay to 100%. Since the tier 4 announcement he has been put back on furlough completely.

As tier 4 is looking like it will continue through Jan/Feb, and so unlikely he will be going back anytime soon DH had applied for another job to keep him busy rather than sit at home. DH found out before Christmas he has got the job and he has made this new employer aware that this job will just be a fill in whilst he is on furlough and the employer has accepted this and are happy to take him on. (its a friend of a friend type thing)

Spoke with my friend and earlier and told her about DH's new temporary position explaining that its better than him sitting at home all day /gives him something to do until all this passes etc. My friend took umbrage with this and said that we are abusing the system and that this isnt what the scheme was designed for. I didn't really know what to say and so said sorry she was offended and would speak to her later on.

For background before anyone says anything, I was not being insensitive, my friend has not suffered financially due to COVID as she has been working from home continuously throughout.

I want to call my friend back soon as to not let the bad feeling grow. How would you suggest I approach this? I do not think we are doing anything wrong, just trying to get through this pandemic and doing the best for our family as would anyone else.

OP posts:
MaryLeeOnHigh · 29/12/2020 08:22

The OP hasn't changed her view, in fact even went further, claiming her Dh could be made redundant soon, but as others have said that argument doesn't sit because we all could!

People who have been furloughed are at greater risk of redundancy than others. By definition the scheme is there as an alternative to redundancy, but even so an awful lot of businesses are really struggling and will have to make redundancies if or when the furlough scheme ends. It stands to reason that employees who they have been managing without for months are going to be prime candidates.

MadameBlobby · 29/12/2020 08:24

I'm sorry for your DH situation, but what he is doing is fraud. It is a crime, like benefits fraud.

No it isn’t

HRHRomy · 29/12/2020 08:25

I think it's very grabby. There are people more deservant of the job than him. I don't buy there isn't anything but paid work for him to do.

MaryLeeOnHigh · 29/12/2020 08:26

Getting another job whilst living off public finances may be legal but it’s clearly not the intention of why the scheme was designed.

If it is so "clearly not the intention", why did the guidance go out of its way to explain clearly that this is perfectly legal?

HRHRomy · 29/12/2020 08:26

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

millymae · 29/12/2020 08:27

I can’t get het up about this - in the last lockdown I saw more than one person I knew to have been furloughed from jobs in the hospitality sector working in supermarkets stacking shelves.
Plenty of people have more than one job and to me providing it’s all done properly and not on a cash in hand basis then it’s not wrong. Neither is it taking jobs from others who desperately need them. You can’t blame people for wanting to legally make the best of a bad situation and if people apply for jobs it’s not their fault that they are hired .
Those on here moaning about OPs husband would do better directing their attention towards those who have genuinely defrauded the system that was introduced.

TerryHearn · 29/12/2020 08:29

@MaryLeeOnHigh

Getting another job whilst living off public finances may be legal but it’s clearly not the intention of why the scheme was designed.

If it is so "clearly not the intention", why did the guidance go out of its way to explain clearly that this is perfectly legal?

Wrong. Taking further jobs was intended for people who were only receiving 80% of salary through furlough. So they could top themselves up to pre-Covid income levels. The OP’s husband is earning more than pre-Covid from this arrangement. Certainly not what was intended and taking advantage of a loophole.
ConiferGate · 29/12/2020 08:31

If it is so "clearly not the intention", why did the guidance go out of its way to explain clearly that this is perfectly legal?

FFS I’ve said this twice today. Most likely to give people the opportunity to make up the extra 20% of their salary if they needed to.

MadameBlobby · 29/12/2020 08:32

Do we know what the third job is? Why are people so insistent that there are lots of random people out there who could have done it?

SnowGnome · 29/12/2020 08:33

And also because it was never meant to be long term wasn’t intended to stop people from being able to get a new job (and give up the old one) if theirs was at risk.

getwhatyougive · 29/12/2020 08:33

The pearl clutching hysteria on this is hilarious.

I hope everyone here who is speechless and flabbergasted at this post is out today volunteering and helping to pay someone else’s mortgage Grin

Parker231 · 29/12/2020 08:39

Lots of people are doing this, nothing illegal about it. Many are working in supermarkets and as delivery drivers.

Many people who are currently on furlough won’t have a job to go back to so anything you can do to protect yourselves is good.

user1488819536 · 29/12/2020 08:40

You are allowed to get another job whilst on furlough. The girl that is furloughed from me I'd working at Tescos.
It is def allowed as I sent her the letter which stated it was fine.

MaryLeeOnHigh · 29/12/2020 08:44

@ConiferGate

If it is so "clearly not the intention", why did the guidance go out of its way to explain clearly that this is perfectly legal?

FFS I’ve said this twice today. Most likely to give people the opportunity to make up the extra 20% of their salary if they needed to.

The fact that you have said what you believe is "most likely" doesn't make it true. The point of the 20% reduction is in part that people don't have to incur expanses like travelling to work, buying lunches at work, paying for child care etc.

It's perfectly simple, if the government had not intended that people could get paid work whilst on furlough, it could have included that in the regulations and guidance. It didn't, and went to some trouble when drafting the guidance to ensure that people knew that this was both legal and permissible. It equally didn't choose to say "you can't work if your employer chooses to top up your pay". Blaming people for doing what the government specifically tells them they can do really is pretty ridiculous.

Lampzade · 29/12/2020 08:48

The government know that when the furlough scheme eventually ends that many of those on furlough will be made redundant which is why they have allowed those on furlough to take on other work.

MaryLeeOnHigh · 29/12/2020 08:49

Wrong. Taking further jobs was intended for people who were only receiving 80% of salary through furlough. So they could top themselves up to pre-Covid income levels. The OP’s husband is earning more than pre-Covid from this arrangement. Certainly not what was intended and taking advantage of a loophole.

So why didn't the guidance expressly limit the pay you could earn from any further job to the equivalent of the 20% top-up? And why was it not written into the regulations that this was impossible if your employer was paying the extra 20%?

My uncle has a fruit farm. If he had been prevented from employing people on furlough or had to limit the hours for which he employed people so that they didn't make extra money out of it, he would have had a massive problem with the harvest.

wowfudge · 29/12/2020 08:51

@HRHRomy

There are people desperate for a job, any job. Who are not entitled to furlough. And here you are, have a perfect excuse for not actually working and instead of doing something interesting or selfless, you are so greedy.
Or maybe those people desperate for a job aren't doing enough to find one, don't have the skills for the jobs available or aren't in the right area or prepared to move. Or any combination of the above. If it's what you want, you make it happen instead of blaming others for hindering you.
PTW1234 · 29/12/2020 08:56

I can’t get my knickers in a twist over this to be fair. OPs husband is already doing 2 jobs, suggests that they are not particularly wealthy in the first place.

Amazon delivery drivers do not get paid mega bucks, OPs husband is also paying emergency tax on this job.

When there are mass redundancies in 2021, I do wonder if people will start to blame the furloughed and for not using their “time off” to find alternative employment Hmm.

It’s a bit hysterical to suggest OPs husband has “stolen a job” or somehow doing something immoral...

PTW1234 · 29/12/2020 08:59

Also there has been a temporary surge for delivery drivers etc. The key is temporary. Lots of these delivery jobs will not exist by the end of next year.

Boxofsaltsachets · 29/12/2020 09:01

Although it's legal, I do think it's wrong. I was under the impression that allowing people to still work whilst furloughed was to stop people who are on low wages, rely on overtime to make ends meet, and then losing 20%, going under completely. I think it's better that people like that have a way to top up their earnings to a livable level, and some people make extra, than not allowing it at all and some people going under.
I was furloughed first time around, and it was hard. I didn't save anything by not being at work, so there was no offset there, I was just lucky it was warm so we could cut down on things like gas and electric. I did get into a bit of debt too, which I'm still paying back.
And yes, I volunteered for the time I was on furlough, I wasn't allowed to get another job as per my contract, but also didn't want to sit around doing nothing.
I don't think it should be stopped because of the reasons outlined above, but I'd have a negative view of one of my friends doing this if they weren't doing it to make ends meet and were ending up with more than they did before furlough.
People keep saying that we're all in it together, but we're really not.

ConiferGate · 29/12/2020 09:03

So many of the attitudes on here really reflect what I hate about this country. The individualism, the I’m alright Jack, the someone else can pay for it brigade.

It might not be illegal, but to pretend that in some way that it’s morally ok to be fleecing public finances for money you don’t need because you’re working elsewhere is a joke. As pp pointed out above, this is why some businesses who have profited during the pandemic are starting to pay back some of the eg rates relief they received.

Let’s face it, anyone who is on furlough and earning more than 100% of their former salary by working in another job is profiting from the pandemic. But hey, as long as it’s someone else who’s paying for it either through taxes or by suffering on the pitiful amount that UC pays because there’s not enough money to increase it, then who cares right?

getwhatyougive · 29/12/2020 09:04

@PTW1234

I can’t get my knickers in a twist over this to be fair. OPs husband is already doing 2 jobs, suggests that they are not particularly wealthy in the first place.

Amazon delivery drivers do not get paid mega bucks, OPs husband is also paying emergency tax on this job.

When there are mass redundancies in 2021, I do wonder if people will start to blame the furloughed and for not using their “time off” to find alternative employment Hmm.

It’s a bit hysterical to suggest OPs husband has “stolen a job” or somehow doing something immoral...

Completely agree

It’s classic MN mayhem on this thread. Someone on furlough (who didn’t ask to be furloughed) tries to do a bit better for their family and have a bit more money coming in and gets an absolute pasting while everyone else sits in their ivory tower crowing that he shouldn’t have the job because you know, someone more needy deserves it. Only volunteering is acceptable, regardless of the fact hardly anywhere is accepting volunteers due to coronavirus.

I’d like to know exactly how many people contributing to this thread actually do in fact volunteer and only accept jobs with a certain salary so that others more deserving can the jobs.

Show of hands anyone?

getwhatyougive · 29/12/2020 09:06

@ConiferGate

So many of the attitudes on here really reflect what I hate about this country. The individualism, the I’m alright Jack, the someone else can pay for it brigade.

It might not be illegal, but to pretend that in some way that it’s morally ok to be fleecing public finances for money you don’t need because you’re working elsewhere is a joke. As pp pointed out above, this is why some businesses who have profited during the pandemic are starting to pay back some of the eg rates relief they received.

Let’s face it, anyone who is on furlough and earning more than 100% of their former salary by working in another job is profiting from the pandemic. But hey, as long as it’s someone else who’s paying for it either through taxes or by suffering on the pitiful amount that UC pays because there’s not enough money to increase it, then who cares right?

But the thing is @ConiferGate if you don’t look after yourself then no-one else will. Doris down the road isn’t going to suddenly start paying my mortgage if I get made redundant so why wouldn’t you plan for yourself and your family?
SinkGirl · 29/12/2020 09:08

It’s allowed under the scheme so any issues with that should be directed at the government.

However, the issue for me here is that his employers who are no doubt experiencing a drop in trade if staff are furloughed are topping his wages up to 100% themselves while he’s making money elsewhere. That shouldn’t be necessary if he’s working elsewhere.

ConiferGate · 29/12/2020 09:11

@getwhatyougive I took a 75% pay cut to look after elderly parents before they were so ill they had to go into care. When not during pandemic, rather than go back to former job I then spent lots of extra time at the CH spending time with people, taking them for walks etc. usually did mum’s personal care and feeding to free up care home staff time.

That good enough for you? No, probably doesn’t fit your narrative right.