A moral dilemma over CJRS extension

How far should employers help out former staff by re-employing them under the extended CJRS scheme?

Didn't find your answer?

Like many small businesses, we let staff go at the end of October as their role is no longer required.  Our former employee has now come back to request that he be re-employed and put on furlough.  The total cost to the business of the NI, pension and annual leave would be about £300 per month.  

The worker was with us less than 1 year before March lockdown, spent most of April to October on furlough and we do not wish him to work for us in future. 

 Our business has been significantly affected by COVID  but we've not qualified for any grant support.  My co-director and I are split over this.  He feels no obligation and would prefer a clean break.  My feeling is that our business could just about afford this and it would give very significant support to the former worker.  We don't know his situation except that he is young, single and renting without any partner to share the bills. 

How are others responding to requests for re-employment?

 

 

 

Replies (22)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Richard Grant
09th Nov 2020 12:16

If the job no longer exists then I would say taking them back on is claiming money under false pretences. You can do it because it is allowed but it's up to you to decide.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Richard Grant:
avatar
By nippy1
09th Nov 2020 12:31

Richard Grant wrote:

If the job no longer exists then I would say taking them back on is claiming money under false pretences. You can do it because it is allowed but it's up to you to decide.

I joined an HMRC webinar last week and asked about this. Here's the advice from the chatlog
Audience Question:
Q: Can we furlough staff even if we do not have any realistic expectation that they will have a job at the end of the scheme?
A: Yes, provided your employees were on your PAYE payroll by 23:59 30 October 2020. This means a Real Time Information (RTI) submission notifying payment for that employee to HMRC must have been made between 20 March 2020 and 30 October 2020.

Thanks (1)
Replying to nippy1:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
09th Nov 2020 13:03

Not quite the same
Existing employee furloughed is different to taking on an ex employee.

Thanks (0)
Replying to nippy1:
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2020 13:03

nippy1 wrote:

Richard Grant wrote:

If the job no longer exists then I would say taking them back on is claiming money under false pretences. You can do it because it is allowed but it's up to you to decide.

I joined an HMRC webinar last week and asked about this. Here's the advice from the chatlog
Audience Question:
Q: Can we furlough staff even if we do not have any realistic expectation that they will have a job at the end of the scheme?
A: Yes, provided your employees were on your PAYE payroll by 23:59 30 October 2020. This means a Real Time Information (RTI) submission notifying payment for that employee to HMRC must have been made between 20 March 2020 and 30 October 2020.

Richard's point remains valid. Can do? yes. Should do? Job not there. No intention of having him back. So no.

Heart ruling head.

Want to genuinely help someone, give them a job where you will keep them.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Richard Grant:
avatar
By Anonymous.
09th Nov 2020 16:39

Richard Grant wrote:

If the job no longer exists then I would say taking them back on is claiming money under false pretences.

And presumably there is no tax deduction for the wages paid!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By OldParkAcct
09th Nov 2020 12:35

The former worker has had 6 months to find other work if they wanted, but have not bothered. Suggest you explain to them you are giving them the opportunity to find a new career and wish them well, but do not re-employ.
The last 6 months has highlighted the difference in attitude to work, some people have been furloughed and used that time to train or work elsewhere and others have done nothing. Over the next few years this would make an interesting starting point for interviewing new employees.

Thanks (2)
Replying to OldParkAcct:
avatar
By paul.benny
09th Nov 2020 12:57

OldParkAcct wrote:

The former worker has had 6 months to find other work if they wanted, but have not bothered.

The OP doesn't say anything about the former employee's efforts to find other work.

Thanks (0)
Replying to OldParkAcct:
avatar
By steve.oldham
12th Nov 2020 11:28

OldParkAcct wrote:

The former worker has had 6 months to find other work if they wanted, but have not bothered. Suggest you explain to them you are giving them the opportunity to find a new career and wish them well, but do not re-employ.
The last 6 months has highlighted the difference in attitude to work, some people have been furloughed and used that time to train or work elsewhere and others have done nothing. Over the next few years this would make an interesting starting point for interviewing new employees.

Clearly showing a lack of appreciation of the job market currently.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NYB
09th Nov 2020 12:43

You say you let staff "go" in the plural. One has come back. Like sheep the others could follow. It sounds as though you dont want him back. You CAN take him back but equally you DON'T have to.
being a boss is tough.
Say no would be my response.

Thanks (2)
Replying to NYB:
avatar
By nippy1
09th Nov 2020 12:55

It's just one person who has been let go so there's no risk of setting a precedent for others to follow.

Thanks (0)
Replying to NYB:
avatar
By nippy1
09th Nov 2020 13:00

It's just one person who has been let go so there's no risk of setting a precedent for others to follow.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2020 13:00

nippy1 wrote:

Like many small businesses, we let staff go at the end of October as their role is no longer required.  Our former employee has now come back to request that he be re-employed and put on furlough.  The total cost to the business of the NI, pension and annual leave would be about £300 per month.  

The worker was with us less than 1 year before March lockdown, spent most of April to October on furlough and we do not wish him to work for us in future. 

 Our business has been significantly affected by COVID  but we've not qualified for any grant support.  My co-director and I are split over this.  He feels no obligation and would prefer a clean break.  My feeling is that our business could just about afford this and it would give very significant support to the former worker.  We don't know his situation except that he is young, single and renting without any partner to share the bills. 

How are others responding to requests for re-employment?

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2020 13:07

Duplicate

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2020 13:01

''we do not wish him to work for us in future''

Why? Key I suggest to the decision making, although sounds like you have made up your mind.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By lesley.barnes
09th Nov 2020 13:37

From your post the ex employee isn't going to work for you in the future, he was employed for less than a year before March, you want to re employ him a put him on furlough presumably until next March. Will he be entitled to redundancy if you let him go when furlough finishes? If furlough is extended again after March 2021 do you intend to continue to furlough until furlough runs out? It could cost you a lot more than the £300 a month for nothing. As you say you can just about manage the £300 what happens if you find you can't do you take a pay cut? Personally I wouldn't take him back if you don't need him and going forward if you don't intend to employ him it is giving him false hope.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
09th Nov 2020 14:06

Holiday pay is at full rate
80% now
Will it stay at that rate?

Thanks (0)
Glenn Martin
By Glenn Martin
09th Nov 2020 14:23

For me the extension is to long. I would have done it until end of year, then looked at industry specific support after that.

For me the scheme is now wide open for abuse. Businesses that normally close for 2 weeks at Christmas as part of business owners costs, now will likely furlough the staff and have the government pick up the cost.

Likewise many businesses have a bad January, where they may break even or make a small loss, now do they furlough the staff in Jan & Feb when previously that cost would just have been part of trading over a 12 month period.

I can see a lot of businesses not even trying and just furloughing staff.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By NYB
09th Nov 2020 14:31

i think this extension is coming home to the likes of us involved in fnance and being at the coal face with Furlough. The first three months we were all in a panic and it had its place. The next 4 months with the gradual reduction seemed a fair move, Then again more panic with 80% for 5 months ( or is it 6).
Just breaking news this afternoon is the major announcement re a vaccine ready to roll. Its over all the news and Boris is to speak. The experts reckon this brings normality back by the middle of next year

Thanks (0)
A Putey FACA
By Arthur Putey
09th Nov 2020 14:34

Perhaps if you want to be nice to the person you could take them back but make them work, and let others take their holidays.

Its a pity the government couldn't have found something useful for all the furloughed people to do, community projects and the like. They still could ......

Thanks (3)
Replying to Arthur Putey:
avatar
By the_drookit_dug
09th Nov 2020 14:59

Working on outdoor access gets my vote - creating new rural walking routes

Thanks (0)
Replying to the_drookit_dug:
avatar
By bernard michael
10th Nov 2020 09:20

What's in it for the OP except minus £300 per month

Thanks (0)
John Hextall
By John Hextall
12th Nov 2020 12:52

Setting aside morality for the moment, if you have issued a P45, final payment, FPS that indicates he has left; then re-employing him may set off alarm bells. If you haven't finalised his employment, then furloughing for another 6 months will bring you dangerously close to 2 years employment, at which point there could be various claims made against you. It will cost you £300 a month (maybe more) and your co-Director sensibly prefers a clean break. It does not look like a good idea. Is there any other way you could help this chap?

Thanks (0)