furlough Archives - The Stray Ferret

Harrogate district unemployment rate continues to fall

The number of people receiving out-of-work benefits in the Harrogate district has continued to fall, despite the furlough scheme ending at the end of September.

Latest figures by the Office for National Statistics show 2,225 people were claiming the benefits on November 11, which is 150 fewer than October’s figure of 2,375.

The benefits include Universal Credit, which can also be claimed by people who are in work but on low incomes.

The furlough scheme ended on September 30 and supported around 28,600 jobs in the Harrogate district for 18 months.

Unemployment in Harrogate district falls despite end of furlough

The number of people receiving out-of-work benefits in the Harrogate district has continued to fall, despite the furlough scheme ending at the end of September.

Latest figures by the Office for National Statistics show 2,375 people in the district were claiming the benefits as of October 14.

This is 115 fewer than the 2,490 figure for September 12. The benefits include Universal Credit, which can also be claimed by people who are in work but on low incomes.

The furlough scheme ended on September 30 and supported around 28,600 jobs in the Harrogate district for 18 months.

The figures appear to have calmed fears raised by the local Liberal Democrats that the scheme would result in up to 3,600 job losses in the district.

Speaking last month, Cllr Pat Marsh, leader of the opposition group on Harrogate Borough Council, said the Liberal Democrats both locally and nationally were demanding the scheme be extended to protect jobs.

County council claimed £3.9m in furlough during pandemic

North Yorkshire County Council has revealed it claimed £3.9million of government cash to furlough staff during the coronavirus pandemic.

The authority – which is the largest employer in the county – said a total of 1,288 jobs were supported by the scheme, which came to an end last Thursday after 18 months.

According to government guidance, public sector organisations were not expected to furlough their workforce and staff whose work was no longer possible had to be considered for redeployment.

However, where councils had arms-length organisations which rely on income and not public money, then furloughing staff was allowed.

A county council spokesperson said:

“The county council has claimed furlough payments for staff within its traded services

“Traded services staff are those who work within commercial companies created by the county council, sometimes with partners.

“The furloughed posts would normally be funded by income to these companies, but this stopped, or was greatly reduced during the pandemic.

“These traded services areas include such things as elements of waste management, building design consultancy, commercial property development, and high-speed broadband provision.”

Furlough payments were claimed for school catering staff during lockdown closures, as well as staff in the county council’s outdoor learning service which it said could not operate due to covid restrictions.

The spokesperson added:

“We furloughed 1,288 posts since its introduction, affecting 1,132 individual employees. This figure includes many who rolled on and off furlough and others furloughed only for a short time.

“This has to be seen in the context of a package of government support to deal with the financial impacts of covid across the council.

“It has, therefore, helped in the council’s response to support business, communities, residents and staff.”

No furlough claims by Harrogate Borough Council

Meanwhile, Harrogate Borough Council did not claim any money from the furlough scheme.

Cllr Pat Marsh, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the authority, this week made calls for the scheme to be extended in order to avoid what she fears will be a “tidal wave of job losses” at businesses.

She said:

“Although many may find work in recovering sectors such as hospitality and travel, there is also likely to be a rise in unemployment due to new redundancies as businesses fail without the support of furlough.”

The furlough scheme saw the government pay towards the wages of employees who could not work, or whose employers could no longer afford to pay them, up to a monthly limit of £2,500.

At first it paid 80% of their usual wage, but in August and September it paid 60%, with employers paying 20%.

In total, the scheme cost around £70billion – and Harrogate and Knaresborough MP Andrew Jones said now was the right time for it to end.

He said:

“The furlough scheme is estimated to have cost £70 billion and this will need repaying. But the human and financial cost of letting industries, businesses and jobs go to the wall during lockdown would have been catastrophic.

“It is going to be a bumpy road ahead even so but without the actions that were taken it is difficult to imagine what the situation would have been.”

Fears for thousands of Harrogate district jobs as furlough ends

There are fears for the jobs of around 3,600 workers in the Harrogate district in the wake of last week’s ending of furlough.

The government scheme introduced at the start of the covid outbreak has protected millions of jobs during the pandemic, with Conservative Harrogate and Knaresborough MP Andrew Jones saying it “got our country through the darkest days of the lockdown”.

But Liberal Democrat councillors in the district have warned that businesses and employees could now be hit by a “tidal wave of job losses” unless more support is made available.

Cllr Pat Marsh, leader of the opposition group on Harrogate Borough Council, said the Liberal Democrats both locally and nationally were demanding the scheme be extended for businesses hit hardest by the pandemic.

She said:

“The withdrawal of furlough risks having a devastating impact on at least 3,600 people in the Harrogate area who are already facing a winter of soaring energy bills and cuts to benefits.

“Supporting them and their families is both the right and responsible thing to do.

“Although many may find work in recovering sectors such as hospitality and travel, there is also likely to be a rise in unemployment due to new redundancies as businesses fail without the support of furlough.”

Some workers who relied on furlough are also now facing the added worry of the end of the £20-a-week boost to Universal Credit.

This temporary increase to payments, which was introduced in response to the pandemic, ends tomorrow.

Citizens Advice has described this as a “disastrous decision” by the government and warned around 1.5 million claimants across the UK could be pushed into hardship this winter.

Dame Clare Moriarty, chief executive of the charity, said:

“Shop workers, nursery assistants and security guards are just some of the people on Universal Credit seeking our help because they’re already struggling to make ends meet.”

Supported 28,600 jobs in Harrogate district

The furlough scheme supported around 28,600 jobs in the Harrogate district for 18 months.

It saw the government pay around £70 billion towards the wages of employees across the UK who could not work, or whose employers could no longer afford to pay them, up to a monthly limit of £2,500.

At first it paid 80% of their usual wage, but in August and September it paid 60%, with employers paying 20%.

Since its end, Chancellor Rishi Sunak has pledged more than £500 million in fresh funding to help people back into work and support sectors which are facing recruitment crises.

Funding for the new packages will not be set out until later this month and it comes at a time when Mr Sunak and Prime Minister Boris Johnson are facing pressure to ease the historically high tax burden.

Harrogate and Knaresborough MP Mr Jones said while now was the right time for furlough to end, the extra funding showed the government was willing to continue its support for jobs during the covid recovery.

He added:

“The furlough scheme is estimated to have cost £70bn and this will need repaying. But the human and financial cost of letting industries, businesses and jobs go to the wall during lockdown would have been catastrophic.

“It is going to be a bumpy road ahead even so but without the actions that were taken it is difficult to imagine what the situation would have been.”

‘Upset and cynicism’ over October redundancies says Harrogate lawyer

A Harrogate employment lawyer says people who lost their jobs on the last day of October are upset and cynical.

Richard Port, principal solicitor at Boardside Ltd in Harrogate, said he was aware of cases where firms had put restructure plans in place for October 31, so will have lost staff on the same day the Prime Minister announced another lockdown and an extension to furlough.

The furlough scheme will see the government pay for 80% of employee salaries up to £2,500 a month. However, employers will have to cover pension and national insurance contributions.

The scheme was supposed to end on October 31, but now is going to end in early December.

Richard Port, Boardside Legal

Mr Port said some businesses will have met the announcement with surprise.

He said employees could return to their employer to ask for their jobs back, but most businesses have already made restructures due to the end of furlough.

Mr Port said:

“I think people are just disappointed. What they can do is go back to their employer and ask if they can take them back on.

“But I do not think many employers will want to do it.”

He added that the virus was taking its toll on all business.

“It is perfectly viable businesses that are shutting because of this. People are struggling to get their heads around it.

“The classic example is the pub. That is a part of our culture. It is a part of the British way of life and it is going.”

Wedding venue transforms into ski lodge to save staff

A luxury Harrogate wedding venue is transforming into a ski lodge restaurant to keep staff in work this winter.

Current covid restrictions limit weddings to a maximum of 15 guests.

This has had a huge impact on venues like Wharfedale Grange, near Harewood, which is able to seat 270 wedding guests and can cater for 165 people in its restaurant.

It hopes that by adapting the use of its barn it will be able to retain staff, especially with the furlough scheme ending this month.

Claire Thomas, managing director of Wharfedale Grange, said:

“We’ve got 18 full-time staff and 12 part-time staff so we’re effectively keeping 30 people in work by converting to a restaurant and not making them redundant.”

Described as ‘La Folie Douce meets Yorkshire’, the restaurant — called Apres Bar & Grill — will incorporate elements of ski lodge resorts.

It is due to open from November 1 to the end of March.

Fears Harrogate food bank will see spike in demand when furlough ends

Organisers of the Harrogate food bank are concerned there maybe an increase in demand for food when the furlough scheme ends.

The Stray Ferret reported in May that the amount of people who used Harrogate’s food bank more than doubled when lockdown was introduced. The facility, located at the Mowbray Community Church has continued to see a high level of demand.

Linda Macrow, the temporary project manager, thinks that the end of the furlough scheme could cause a further increase in demand. She said:

“I suspect numbers might increase but we will have to wait and see what happens”.

Among those needing its services are single people, who could be facing job difficulties, and people who are homeless.

Linda feels confident that the organisation will adapt to any situation, as the food bank is well supported by volunteers and donations. She told the Stray Ferret:

“The people of Harrogate have always been very generous”.

North Yorkshire County Council recently allocated £18,055 of funding to other Harrogate organisations that help people get enough food. It is part of a national grant to local authorities from the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.

The money will be divided between two community groups: Resurrected Bites and Supporting Older People.

Andrew Jones MP ‘out of touch’ on furlough, say Lib Dems

Harrogate and Knaresborough Liberal Democrats have accused local MP, Andrew Jones, of being “out of touch” on the government’s furlough scheme coming to an end.

It comes as the government is set to wind back the scheme and companies will have to contribute more to employees wages.

Mr Jones is reported to have said concerns over a surge in unemployment at the end of the scheme were “alarmist”.

Around 160,000 people have been on furlough in the Harrogate district and the scheme is set to finish at the end of October.

But local Lib Dems said that the rolling back of the scheme will put a “greater burden” on local businesses and those who need to make ends meet.

Judith Rogerson, Lib Dem parliamentary spokesperson, said:

“Our hospitality and retail sectors are under enormous pressure locally; reducing the support given by the furlough scheme will only force businesses to meet yet another significant cost.

“The furlough scheme is the only thing keeping many families across Harrogate & Knaresborough afloat, so it is completely understandable that people are hugely concerned how they will make ends meet if the government brings this support to an end before the pandemic is over. It is simply out of touch for Andrew Jones to claim that this is ‘alarmist’.

“At this time of immense stress and disruption, people need as much certainty as they can get if they are to get back on their feet. We need our MP to recognise this and be doing all he can to get residents the support they need.”

Chancellor Rishi Sunak has previously said that the furlough scheme cannot “carry on indefinitely” and that it would be “wrong to keep people trapped” in a situation where there may be no job to go back to.

Previously, the government had been paying 80% of wages of those employees on the job retention scheme up to a maximum of £2,500 a month.

But, from today, the government will pay employee wages of 70% up to a cap of £2,187.50 a month and employers will pay 10%.

Next month, that will reduce to 60% up to a cap of £1,875 as companies contribute 20%.

Andrew Jones MP was approached for comment but did not respond at the time of publication.

COLUMN: What happens if your job is at risk after furlough

This article is written for the Stray Ferret by Harrogate employment lawyer Richard Port. Richard is Principal Solicitor and Founding Director at Boardside legal. In a series of articles, he explores the issues raised for employers and employees returning to work post furlough. This article is not legal advice – more a look at the complexities of the current situation.

This week Richard looks at what to do if you lose your job:

So, in recent weeks, I have written about necessary considerations for employees returning to work following the easing of lockdown. In this third article, we now look at the issue of restructurings and, sadly, the prospect of redundancies in the context of COVID-19.

Unfortunately, as the lockdown restrictions ease and employers slowly return to more ’normal’ ways of working, it is clear to us from instructions being received that the impact of the coronavirus means some businesses will have to seriously consider restructuring and the inevitable consequential risk of redundancies in order to survive.

The government’s furlough scheme has enabled employers to receive compensation from the government for certain employment costs. That scheme has been subject to amendment on a number of occasions, including by now allowing employers to take advantage of part-time furloughing. However, the scheme will end in its entirety on 31October 2020.

The fact that an employer has furloughed staff does not prevent that employer from dismissing employees on grounds of redundancy. However, the existence of the furlough scheme until 31 October means that employees could well challenge the need for redundancies. However, such a challenge may carry less force from 1 August from which date employers will be expected to shoulder more of the financial burden of the furlough scheme themselves.

Where a company is proposing redundancies in relation to any roles held by furloughed staff, it needs to ensure that the process is carried out fairly, thereby reducing the risk of tribunal litigation. Of course, such steps will include meaningful consultation, in line with legal obligations, taking into account staff may be working remotely.

In terms of consultation, it is clear from the guidance in relation to the furlough scheme that employee representatives can still act without being considered to be “working” but employers will be well advised to bear in mind the following:

if there is an established means of communicating with staff who are absent organisation (e.g. whilst on authorised leave including secondment), then can that be used in these circumstances?
What is the best way to convey relevant information, bearing in mind the employees’ access to IT?
Is it possible/appropriate for certain meetings to take place remotely? Or, if they are to take place in person, can adequate social distancing measures be put in place?
How is confidentiality to be maintained?
is the consultation time framework adequate, bearing in mind the potential use of video technology?
The employer shall acknowledge that the process may be more stressful than normal given the unusual circumstances, and look to provide appropriate support accordingly.

These are hard times for everyone, but it is important that employers plan their restructuring processes carefully, to support employees as best they can thereby to reduce the risk of future litigation.

Redundancy exercises are stressful but, conducted sensitively with effective communication and proper consultation that take into account guidelines and measures to deal with the coronavirus pandemic, are key.

Column: Can your employer force you to return to work?

This week, he looks at where an employee stands if he is asked to return to his workplace, but does not want to do so.

My client, ABC Ltd is a food production business, meaning that as an essential service it has continued to operate in lockdown. Many, but not all, of its employees have continued to work, albeit paying due regard to health and safety measures in the workplace, in line with government guidelines.

‘Fred’ was one of a small number of employees who were furloughed in response to Covid-19, at least until ABC Ltd recently asked Fred, in particular, to return to the workplace. But he was not keen.

Employees may be reluctant to return to work for a variety of reasons, some of which may not be genuine, but many of which are likely to be so (often supported by various legal protections). Even if ABC Ltd believes that a reluctant returner is exaggerating his other concerns, it would still need to approach the problem with caution, dealing with those ‘concerns’ very carefully indeed.

As an adviser to ABC Ltd, I have had to discuss various scenarios with the client warning them about how easy it is to get things wrong and with it the very real risk of exposure to legal proceedings and the significant associated costs.

Like all employees, Fred has certain protections should he refuse to attend the workplace because of a reasonable fear of ‘serious and imminent danger’, a concept that will differ from one employee to another. For Fred, one major concern was the matter of travel to work on public transport, the risk of which he finds unacceptable.

Bearing in mind that the concept of ‘clinically vulnerable’ includes the over 70s and those with underlying health conditions, I also discussed with ABC Ltd Fred’s age and the fact he has no known health conditions. Fred is in his 60s, so does not trigger the age qualification for being clinically vulnerable, so potential age discrimination was not relevant.

It has been well documented that a number of employees have suffered with the consequences of Covid-19. My concern was that this could potentially be an issue for Fred, save that Fred’s own GP refuses to sign him off work.

Nonetheless, ABC Ltd should still listen to his concerns about returning to work, to understand how he is coping and what his real concerns about returning to his duties are. Remember, employers have an obligation to consider reasonable adjustments, including employees’ work patterns.

Finally, employees do have a right to request a reasonable amount of time off caring for dependants, albeit this would be unpaid. Fred’s wife does suffer from arthritis and I am aware that he does all of the shopping, for example. However, he has not raised this as an issue and in any event ABC Ltd has already offered him unpaid leave.

But of course, it is one thing thrashing this out with me, quite another to be discussing these types of matters with Fred directly. Effective communication is key to reducing the risk of employment related issues and even an adverse finding at an employment tribunal.

Next week, Richard looks at redundancies as businesses deal with the impact of the covid crisis.

Read more:

Read More:

Read more:

No furlough claims by Harrogate Borough Council

Read More:

Supported 28,600 jobs in Harrogate district

Read more:

Read more:

Read more:

Read more:

Read More:

Read more from Richard Port: