Employee refusing to work due to coronavirus fears
Discussion
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Lord.Vader said:
Wow, what an entitled c**t.
It is precisely people like you, ignoring government advice as to why this is spreading, work from home, it isn’t that difficult, typical, backward, small minded 1950’s ‘manager’ attitude.
Do your own cleaning.
Have you read the government advice?It is precisely people like you, ignoring government advice as to why this is spreading, work from home, it isn’t that difficult, typical, backward, small minded 1950’s ‘manager’ attitude.
Do your own cleaning.
Avoid unnecessary travel / interaction.
Pension admin and you need to be in the office? Ridiculous.
I am managing to support / monitor / control aircraft being built in multiple locations around the world from my house in N.Wales, so I’m sorry but your request is as I said above, small minded 1950’s manager syndrome.
Invest in the systems that allow remote working and save on the overheads of running an office.
There may be a positive out of CV-19 that it drags people in to 2020.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Anyone had this please?
It's my office cleaner. They are there on their own once a week.
At this point in time my view is that seeking to force someone to work against their wishes may well run into constructive dismissal. It may be further that taking any action against such a person (in short, imposing any detriment) could turn it into an automatically unfair dismissal. It's my office cleaner. They are there on their own once a week.
Is the cleaner happy to be furloughed? If so do so. Is the cleaner elderly? Has anyone at home is at higher risk? Are you providing full PPE?
Take their concerns into account, keep paying her and pick up your own bloody duster if you’re that concerned.
Have you any idea about their personal circumstances? Personal or family health problems?
We are all going to suffer from this, and we are all going to have to look in the mirror at some point and ask ‘did I do the right thing?’.
Have you any idea about their personal circumstances? Personal or family health problems?
We are all going to suffer from this, and we are all going to have to look in the mirror at some point and ask ‘did I do the right thing?’.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
An employee cannot be furloughed because they are a scaredy-cat.
Thank you to those that made constructive comments.
I'm with you on this one.Thank you to those that made constructive comments.
Unless they have underlying health issues or a risk of passing it directly onto a vulnerable partner etc, I believe they should be going to work. You do need to create a safe work environment which you've implied.
My staff are all working from home, but prior to that I personally cleaned in a basic way everyone's desk including keyboards etc each evening.
But had I employed a cleaner I'd have expected them to do it.
The aftermath of this situation will see some staff looked at in a different light.
I'm all for protecting the vulnerable, but theirs far to many looking to go home and sit on their arse whilst being paid.
Edited by mikebradford on Saturday 28th March 06:57
From ACAS
ACAS said:
If an employee does not want to go to work
Some people might feel they do not want to go to work if they're afraid of catching coronavirus. This could particularly be the case for those who are at higher risk.
An employer should listen to any concerns staff may have and should take steps to protect everyone.
For example, they could offer extra car parking where possible so that people can avoid using public transport.
If an employee still does not want to go in, they may be able to arrange with their employer to take the time off as holiday or unpaid leave. The employer does not have to agree to this.
If an employee refuses to attend work without a valid reason, it could result in disciplinary action.
Some people might feel they do not want to go to work if they're afraid of catching coronavirus. This could particularly be the case for those who are at higher risk.
An employer should listen to any concerns staff may have and should take steps to protect everyone.
For example, they could offer extra car parking where possible so that people can avoid using public transport.
If an employee still does not want to go in, they may be able to arrange with their employer to take the time off as holiday or unpaid leave. The employer does not have to agree to this.
If an employee refuses to attend work without a valid reason, it could result in disciplinary action.
g3org3y said:
From ACAS
Well that is certainly the legal position but I’m sure an article in the daily mail would be far more damaging to the employer in the end. ACAS said:
If an employee does not want to go to work
Some people might feel they do not want to go to work if they're afraid of catching coronavirus. This could particularly be the case for those who are at higher risk.
An employer should listen to any concerns staff may have and should take steps to protect everyone.
For example, they could offer extra car parking where possible so that people can avoid using public transport.
If an employee still does not want to go in, they may be able to arrange with their employer to take the time off as holiday or unpaid leave. The employer does not have to agree to this.
If an employee refuses to attend work without a valid reason, it could result in disciplinary action.
Some people might feel they do not want to go to work if they're afraid of catching coronavirus. This could particularly be the case for those who are at higher risk.
An employer should listen to any concerns staff may have and should take steps to protect everyone.
For example, they could offer extra car parking where possible so that people can avoid using public transport.
If an employee still does not want to go in, they may be able to arrange with their employer to take the time off as holiday or unpaid leave. The employer does not have to agree to this.
If an employee refuses to attend work without a valid reason, it could result in disciplinary action.
These are strange time’s and employers need to think differently. What do we absolutely need to do to keep the show on the road? Where can these tasks be done? What technology support do we need to get things done? Etc
Anyone who is travelling into an office to sit at a desk and use a computer to do 100% of their work is contributing to the crisis through unnecessary travel. Office cleaning is not essential.
craigjm said:
Well that is certainly the legal position but I’m sure an article in the daily mail would be far more damaging to the employer in the end.
These are strange time’s and employers need to think differently. What do we absolutely need to do to keep the show on the road? Where can these tasks be done? What technology support do we need to get things done? Etc
Anyone who is travelling into an office to sit at a desk and use a computer to do 100% of their work is contributing to the crisis through unnecessary travel. Office cleaning is not essential.
Not every company can have staff working from home. I accept where possible they should.These are strange time’s and employers need to think differently. What do we absolutely need to do to keep the show on the road? Where can these tasks be done? What technology support do we need to get things done? Etc
Anyone who is travelling into an office to sit at a desk and use a computer to do 100% of their work is contributing to the crisis through unnecessary travel. Office cleaning is not essential.
Staff also need to think differently. After this settles we may be in a different financial world. Those making it hard for a company to stay afloat may be looked at in a different light.
Like most things in life it works both ways.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Those that you can rely on to pull their weight in a time of crisis are those that in the long term you will want to retain and reward.
Those that don't, not so much.
Perhaps your cleaner has small children or elderly relatives or there's more to it than you're aware of.Those that don't, not so much.
Personally I'd give a little thought to how you come across on this thread (not well).
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Those that you can rely on to pull their weight in a time of crisis are those that in the long term you will want to retain and reward.
Those that don't, not so much.
And people who are aThose that don't, not so much.
holes in times of crisis, who do not treat people with dignity and respect for their circumstances, will be remembered.A pensions administration company with 4 employees (oh, and a cleaner) that cannot be run with remote connectivity. What do you do to the pensions, tickle them?
Stuart70 said:
And people who are aholes in times of crisis, who do not treat people with dignity and respect for their circumstances, will be remembered.
A pensions administration company with 4 employees (oh, and a cleaner) that cannot be run with remote connectivity. What do you do to the pensions, tickle them?
Employers have memories too.holes in times of crisis, who do not treat people with dignity and respect for their circumstances, will be remembered.A pensions administration company with 4 employees (oh, and a cleaner) that cannot be run with remote connectivity. What do you do to the pensions, tickle them?
mikebradford said:
craigjm said:
Well that is certainly the legal position but I’m sure an article in the daily mail would be far more damaging to the employer in the end.
These are strange time’s and employers need to think differently. What do we absolutely need to do to keep the show on the road? Where can these tasks be done? What technology support do we need to get things done? Etc
Anyone who is travelling into an office to sit at a desk and use a computer to do 100% of their work is contributing to the crisis through unnecessary travel. Office cleaning is not essential.
Not every company can have staff working from home. I accept where possible they should.These are strange time’s and employers need to think differently. What do we absolutely need to do to keep the show on the road? Where can these tasks be done? What technology support do we need to get things done? Etc
Anyone who is travelling into an office to sit at a desk and use a computer to do 100% of their work is contributing to the crisis through unnecessary travel. Office cleaning is not essential.
Staff also need to think differently. After this settles we may be in a different financial world. Those making it hard for a company to stay afloat may be looked at in a different light.
Like most things in life it works both ways.
The outcome of this crisis is likely to be a reassessment as to whether daily commutes and big offices are really necessary these days and it’s about time. Mobile working has been available for a long time now and it’s just a shame that it takes something like this for companies to realise they don’t need to force their employees inti daily commutes.
Sure that will have an impact on employment structure in the future with less needs for trains, tubes, sandwich shops, office space etc etc but that’s no reason why we shouldn’t do it. Fifty years ago people were mainly working in factories that we don’t have anymore. Economies move on.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Stuart70 said:
And people who are aholes in times of crisis, who do not treat people with dignity and respect for their circumstances, will be remembered.
A pensions administration company with 4 employees (oh, and a cleaner) that cannot be run with remote connectivity. What do you do to the pensions, tickle them?
Employers have memories too.holes in times of crisis, who do not treat people with dignity and respect for their circumstances, will be remembered.A pensions administration company with 4 employees (oh, and a cleaner) that cannot be run with remote connectivity. What do you do to the pensions, tickle them?
Kinda reminds me of my boss. He was asking us to work in occupied houses right up to the shutdown.
When the government were asking for only essential journeys to be made the management view was work shall continue in spite of government advice, recommendation or urging. We would only stop if directed by the govt to do so.
Once our clients put a stop to routine installation and non urgent mainainance works the manager found a loophole in the contract where we would still be paid for preinstallation surveys and asbestos checks. This was for work he had no idea when or whether or not it would actually get carried out.
The week before the lockdown just about everyone was "sick" or had a member of their household "sick" requiring self isolation.
Boss was tearing his hair out as his plan was to throw every resource he had into these surveys to make every penny we could prior to lockdown.
He even started asking office based surveyors to carry out home visits. We told him we were happy to carry out urgent reactive repairs where social housing tenants had no heat or holes in their roofs but weren't interested chancing infection if it wasn't worth while and was just making the company money.
It's interesting to see a Richard Branson,/Mike Ashley/Tim Matin type react when you look him in the eye and tell him just making money isn't a worthwhile activity.
When the government were asking for only essential journeys to be made the management view was work shall continue in spite of government advice, recommendation or urging. We would only stop if directed by the govt to do so.
Once our clients put a stop to routine installation and non urgent mainainance works the manager found a loophole in the contract where we would still be paid for preinstallation surveys and asbestos checks. This was for work he had no idea when or whether or not it would actually get carried out.
The week before the lockdown just about everyone was "sick" or had a member of their household "sick" requiring self isolation.
Boss was tearing his hair out as his plan was to throw every resource he had into these surveys to make every penny we could prior to lockdown.
He even started asking office based surveyors to carry out home visits. We told him we were happy to carry out urgent reactive repairs where social housing tenants had no heat or holes in their roofs but weren't interested chancing infection if it wasn't worth while and was just making the company money.
It's interesting to see a Richard Branson,/Mike Ashley/Tim Matin type react when you look him in the eye and tell him just making money isn't a worthwhile activity.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Personally I'd give a little thought to how you come across on this thread (not well).
How about this as a way of deciding:If you are confident about your position re the cleaner e.g. that it represents prudence, sound financial judgement etc, attributes that are important in pensions management, post the name and details of your company here. You should gain some business.
If you think that you and your firm will be judged harshly for your actions, then avoid losing business by not posting your details.
The answer to this should guide you about what the right thing to do is.
craigjm said:
We are talking about a single issue here of a cleaner. If this was a company full of people refusing to work on roles that can be done remotely and with some office time etc then I would agree with you. Employers need to be flexible and employees need to be flexible.
The outcome of this crisis is likely to be a reassessment as to whether daily commutes and big offices are really necessary these days and it’s about time. Mobile working has been available for a long time now and it’s just a shame that it takes something like this for companies to realise they don’t need to force their employees inti daily commutes.
Sure that will have an impact on employment structure in the future with less needs for trains, tubes, sandwich shops, office space etc etc but that’s no reason why we shouldn’t do it. Fifty years ago people were mainly working in factories that we don’t have anymore. Economies move on.
So the cleaner is even less likely to be needed after this is all over then. The outcome of this crisis is likely to be a reassessment as to whether daily commutes and big offices are really necessary these days and it’s about time. Mobile working has been available for a long time now and it’s just a shame that it takes something like this for companies to realise they don’t need to force their employees inti daily commutes.
Sure that will have an impact on employment structure in the future with less needs for trains, tubes, sandwich shops, office space etc etc but that’s no reason why we shouldn’t do it. Fifty years ago people were mainly working in factories that we don’t have anymore. Economies move on.
craigjm said:
We are talking about a single issue here of a cleaner. If this was a company full of people refusing to work on roles that can be done remotely and with some office time etc then I would agree with you. Employers need to be flexible and employees need to be flexible.
The outcome of this crisis is likely to be a reassessment as to whether daily commutes and big offices are really necessary these days and it’s about time. Mobile working has been available for a long time now and it’s just a shame that it takes something like this for companies to realise they don’t need to force their employees inti daily commutes.
Sure that will have an impact on employment structure in the future with less needs for trains, tubes, sandwich shops, office space etc etc but that’s no reason why we shouldn’t do it. Fifty years ago people were mainly working in factories that we don’t have anymore. Economies move on.
That will take a long while to change as plenty of the senior managers 55-65 now are still stuck in the dark ages. Companies (tech, IT) with under 50 MDs are already widely adopting wfh.The outcome of this crisis is likely to be a reassessment as to whether daily commutes and big offices are really necessary these days and it’s about time. Mobile working has been available for a long time now and it’s just a shame that it takes something like this for companies to realise they don’t need to force their employees inti daily commutes.
Sure that will have an impact on employment structure in the future with less needs for trains, tubes, sandwich shops, office space etc etc but that’s no reason why we shouldn’t do it. Fifty years ago people were mainly working in factories that we don’t have anymore. Economies move on.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff