Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Original poster

Sickness/Furlough and annual leave

18 replies

user90543786 · 05/04/2021 15:37

Looking for some advice on behalf of SIL.
She was diagnosed with cancer Jan 2020 and received csp for 8 weeks and ssp for 28 weeks.
She had 2 and a half weeks of annual leave from 2019/20 left to take when she went off sick and it was agreed with her manager it would be carried over for 18 months.
She was due to go back to work in December but manager told her he would furlough her due to shielding, she has been paid her full wage since been on furlough (the company tops up to 100%).
She returned last week and has been told that due to furlough her 3 weeks of holiday have been used to cover that period.
Just wondered if this is ok for her company to do this?

OP posts:
SoddingWeddings · 05/04/2021 15:41

Essentially yes, they can do that, as they can direct when an employee takes annual leave but they are supposed to tell them in advance not after the fact.

Tbh, that notwithstanding, they sound like a half decent employer.

Landlubber2019 · 05/04/2021 15:48

Yes this seems fair tbh.

Moondust001 · 05/04/2021 15:52

On a technicality it might be questionable, but based on the fact that the company seem to have acted reasonably, then I probably wouldn't push it. I presume she still have the annual leave for 20/21?

Original poster
user90543786 · 05/04/2021 16:00

@Moondust001

On a technicality it might be questionable, but based on the fact that the company seem to have acted reasonably, then I probably wouldn't push it. I presume she still have the annual leave for 20/21?
no she has no leave left from 20/21, holiday year runs April - March so she has full amount for 21/22
OP posts:
Ilikewinter · 05/04/2021 16:06

I think her Company have been very fair, once out of SSP she would have been off unpaid, instead they paid her full salary.
My employer pro rata'd holidays for people who were furloughed , but all holiday was cleared by 31st March as our new year starts 1st April.

Bunnybigears · 05/04/2021 16:08

Yes they are allowed to do this and yes I think this is fair

Original poster
user90543786 · 05/04/2021 16:09

@Ilikewinter

I think her Company have been very fair, once out of SSP she would have been off unpaid, instead they paid her full salary. My employer pro rata'd holidays for people who were furloughed , but all holiday was cleared by 31st March as our new year starts 1st April.
She wasn't paid when SSP finished she had 5 months without pay. She has been on full pay since Dec 2020
OP posts:
FannyChops · 05/04/2021 16:13

I think they've been extremely fair and generous.

She should write off the annual leave.

HercwasanEnemyofEducation · 05/04/2021 16:17

Seems fair. My DH has had some of his furlough as annual leave because otherwise everyone would have lots of leave to take in a short period.

MilkHunt50 · 05/04/2021 16:22

Whilst the Company may have acted in her interest on furlough, but sounds like they top upto 100% hence beyond enabling her to be furloughed does not sound like they have applied many exceptions as such. In reality, if she had 5 months unpaid, she could have used her annual leave then to reduce the unpaid window. I think it would be reasonable to ask for some kind of exception to be made as her absence related to long term sickness, and clearly if she had been made aware she would not be able to use her holiday at a later stage, she would have used it during the 5 month period. Due to the nature of her absence, I think a good spirited Company would allow her either to take it as an exception, or to have the holiday allocated during the previous unpaid window so that she receives the appropriate payment. Technically their rationale is flawed but would encourage trying to reach an amicable solution in the spirit that they have tried to support where possible.

Bunnybigears · 05/04/2021 17:55

Why did she have 5 months unpaid? They could have furloughed her from the end of March 2020?

Original poster
user90543786 · 05/04/2021 18:05

@Bunnybigears

Why did she have 5 months unpaid? They could have furloughed her from the end of March 2020?
She was originally off sick with a fit note as she didn't need to shield but has received a shielding letter for the last lockdown.
OP posts:
Bunnybigears · 05/04/2021 18:09

They could still have furlouged her when she was on the sick though, you dont actually need a reason to furlough anybody.

flowery · 05/04/2021 19:37

An employer can require an employee to take holiday in this way, including during furlough. However, to do so they need to give notice in advance, of at least twice as long as the holiday they want you to take.

So technically this is unlawful. Whether your SIL chooses to make an issue of it or not is up to her. Given they have been generous in topping up furlough it may be sensible in the interests of good relations to overlook the fact they didn’t technically give the correct notice. But if she wanted to push it she could.

flowery · 05/04/2021 19:39

@Bunnybigears

They could still have furlouged her when she was on the sick though, you dont actually need a reason to furlough anybody.
You absolutely do need a justifiable reason. Otherwise claiming furlough funding is fraud. An employer can’t just furlough anyone because they feel like it.
Bunnybigears · 05/04/2021 20:06

You absolutely do need a justifiable reason you really don't. They need to fit the criteria for being furloughed i.e when they started working for you etc and you have to pay them following the rules but at no point are you ever asked why you have furloughed them. The fact there is a pandemic and we currently have the Job Retention Scheme is reason enough.

Bunnybigears · 05/04/2021 20:10

applies to employees who are furloughed, “by reason of circumstances arising as a result of coronavirus or coronavirus disease or measures taken to prevent or limit its further transmission”

So the reason for OPs sister would be by not having her in the office they are limiting the transmission of covid.

flowery · 05/04/2021 22:40

@Bunnybigears

You absolutely do need a justifiable reason you really don't. They need to fit the criteria for being furloughed i.e when they started working for you etc and you have to pay them following the rules but at no point are you ever asked why you have furloughed them. The fact there is a pandemic and we currently have the Job Retention Scheme is reason enough.
I take it you haven’t read any of the relevant Treasury Directions or guidance then? The fact there is a pandemic is not remotely justification enough for furloughing someone. Plenty of businesses are doing very well with plenty of work available. Using furlough funding where there is work available and none of the other acceptable reasons like shielding or covid-related childcare difficulties is fraud, simple as that. Which is why HMRC is publishing details of organisations claiming funding and has a whistleblowing site set up for misuse of the scheme.
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread