No furlough, Illegal time banking?

[gun12b]

The company my daughter works for isn't taking the furlough option for Lockdown 3, She works for a retial business which is none essential and has to close.

• For the first week she will be working from home (learning about the business further) and will have this paid for.
• The second week she will have paid authorised leave.
• The third week she will work for the supermarket they are partnered with.
• Then for the fourth week she will have to time bank the hours she contractually works that week and work them back at some point in the future.

My daughter is full time so if she had to keep time banking these hours, she'd never be able to pay them back or be able to work those extra hours.

Is this legal?

[Ham_and_Jam]

gun12b said:

The company my daughter works for isn't taking the furlough option for Lockdown 3, She works for a retial business which is none essential and has to close.

• For the first week she will be working from home (learning about the business further) and will have this paid for.
• The second week she will have paid authorised leave.
• The third week she will work for the supermarket they are partnered with.
• Then for the fourth week she will have to time bank the hours she contractually works that week and work them back at some point in the future.

My daughter is full time so if she had to keep time banking these hours, she'd never be able to pay them back or be able to work those extra hours.

Is this legal?

A lot of businesses are looking at innovative ways to keep their businesses afloat so that everyone keeps their jobs long term.

I don’t think that is unreasonable or unlawful, and certainly under the current circumstances in non essential retail seems a good solution. Some of the alternatives really aren’t that great, so I would happy to do that I if was her.

With regards banking hours, this is quite common in lots of other sectors, and as you are talking about 1 week (36-40 hours), paying back by working 1-2 hours a weeks wouldn’t be hard over 4-6 months.

[anonymous-user]

In my opinion these are desperate times, it seems her employer is doing their best to provide a solution that keeps her employed. Personally I'd be grateful for that.

We could get all "1970's motor industry union" about it and you may have a case which means you win the battle but lose the war. Small comfort when she joins the 4m unemployed. Hope she keeps her job and it all works out.

[Pothole]

gun12b said:

Stuff...

Is this legal?

She won't be in the frame, so why not just assume that it is?

[gun12b]

I think you’re missing my point, I’m not saying that the company my daughter works for is bad and not struggling in these times, everyone is. I’m asking if it’s legal that they can ask their staff to “time bank” their hours. We’re all presuming this lockdown is going to last until the end of March? So each time banked week up to that point would equate to 90+ hours or so. How would a full timer be able to A. Pay that back or B. Work those hours. If she was made redundant she wouldn’t receive a wage at all! Maybe she could take those weeks as unpaid but surely staff shouldn’t be penalised because the business doesn’t want to take the governments help or do they know something we don’t?

[Ham_and_Jam]

gun12b said:

I think you’re missing my point, I’m not saying that the company my daughter works for is bad and not struggling in these times, everyone is. I’m asking if it’s legal that they can ask their staff to “time bank” their hours. We’re all presuming this lockdown is going to last until the end of March? So each time banked week up to that point would equate to 90+ hours or so. How would a full timer be able to A. Pay that back or B. Work those hours. If she was made redundant she wouldn’t receive a wage at all! Maybe she could take those weeks as unpaid but surely staff shouldn’t be penalised because the business doesn’t want to take the governments help or do they know something we don’t?

Time banking is a legitimate way of paying staff where regular or set hours are not normal. It is usually set out in the employee contracts or negotiated at some point, but as this is a once in a lifetime situation I think they are coming up with novel solutions on the hoof so that wages are still being paid as normal.

I would think that the company that employs your daughter assumes she would be happy getting a full weeks wage, whilst not working on the understanding that it is repaid at some point in the furure. The benefit of this arrangement is very much with you daughter.

If you think it isn’t good or legal, challenge it. I’m not sure it’s the route I would take, but that’s your / her prerogative.

[Pothole]

I don't think I understand the question.

[Mojooo]

I am with the OP

If govt support is there why not furlough her rather than get her to owed the company hundreds of hours she may never be able to work back.

[Countdown]

Mojooo said:

I am with the OP

If govt support is there why not furlough her rather than get her to owed the company hundreds of hours she may never be able to work back.

Employer still has to pay NI and pension.

[StevieBee]

Countdown said:

Mojooo said:

I am with the OP

If govt support is there why not furlough her rather than get her to owed the company hundreds of hours she may never be able to work back.

Employer still has to pay NI and pension.

Exactly this.

Furloughing is a benefit to business, not the employee (although they benefit from it).

In addition to NI and Pension, the employer is still obligated to offer holiday pay, insurances, etc. It reduces costs. It doesn't eliminate them.

[mmm-five]

The question you want to ask the employer, is what they consider a reasonable timeframe to 'repay' these owed hours.

If your daughter ends up with 90 hours owing, then simply arranging to do an extra 3h/week (or 30m/day) after may well be acceptable...or the employer may want them 'repaid' as soon as possible, so that 1 week in 4 is 'working for free'. But then you'd only have to work 2-3 week's for 'free' to repay the owed hours.

[Hotdogsandwich101]

I think she would benefit from taking that week as unpaid if time banking is her only option, I wouldn’t want to owe the company hours or money especially in these times. If they aren’t taking the furlough option, what are they doing with those in the company who are vulnerable or shielding? What do each of their weeks look like, I’d be intrigued to see if they are just purely getting paid to work from home and if so on the week your daughter is being made to time bank - why can’t she do an extra week of working from home or another week in the supermarket?

I agee with what you’re saying that something just doesn’t sound right about this, they’re more than likely being legal but it’s put your daughter in a bit of a rubbish situation.

In regards to comments about people saying “furlough is tax payers money”, this girl is a tax payer? If she works for retail she’ll be paying tax so why wouldn’t they take that money back. People are concerned about tax and how we will be paying for the coronavirus for the rest of our lives, which we will. It doesn’t stop other companies taking furlough so why shouldn’t this one.

Side note - If we are supposed to be stopping the spread and limiting contact of people, why would they send staff to a supermarket? Which in my eyes is a front line position!