I started a thread on here a couple of weeks ago about furlough and holidays, firms putting guys on furlough when they knew they were taking their holidays, but essentially getting holiday payed for by the Govt in the form of furlough, whilst ‘losing’ those allocated days as holidays to be taken at another time…(I still say that aint too ethical btw)
This thread is about agency use when drivers are put on furlough.
If the firm has ample work for them,.why are they putting drivers on unspecified furlough and at the same time sending their allocated trucks out every day with an agency driver?
I’m reliably told that this large firm has the usual workload for these trucks, no reduction in it, but all the work of a certain amount of trucks are being routinely manned by agency drivers on normal 100% wages (obviously) whilst their full time employed usual drivers are sat at home on 80% paid by the Government.
This is on a large but seasonal contract btw, but usually when this seasonal job finishes, their drivers go on general,.which is (as now) plentiful and busy, so their trucks are on it, but not manned by their own drivers.
On the other hand, if it was me…bring it in,.I’d gladly stay at home on 80% for sitting on my arse, but I’ve been in the job far too bloody long,.and see it for what it is,.where as a couple of lads I know ain’t happy as they have large financial commitments.
So why are they doing this?
Where I work .smallish company. There’s a few drivers on furlough yet the works.there. I asked if I could.be furloughed as I’m lucky enough to be in a position where i.dont need all the.hours. anymore. Bring someone else back that needs the money . Was told not possible
when you look at.drivers they put.on furlough there decent. Blokes.just.not the hardest working.ones .
Makes me think they’ve put them on furlough because there work shy.
And reading between the lines .our place are hoping if they stay on furlough long.enough…the may get restless /bored short of money…and.maybe look.for.another.job and.leave. thus saving money from redundancy pay or finding a way to sack them.
edd1974:
Where I work .smallish company. There’s a few drivers on furlough yet the works.there. I asked if I could.be furloughed as I’m lucky enough to be in a position where i.dont need all the.hours. anymore. Bring someone else back that needs the money . Was told not possible
when you look at.drivers they put.on furlough there decent. Blokes.just.not the hardest working.ones .
Makes me think they’ve put them on furlough because there work shy.
And reading between the lines .our place are hoping if they stay on furlough long.enough…the may get restless /bored short of money…and.maybe look.for.another.job and.leave. thus saving money from redundancy pay or finding a way to sack them.
Yep, that sounds feasible, and it would be the way I would think it, but I know at least 2 of the drivers in this particular case , and I’m 100% confident that is not the reason.
There must be some tax fiddle/financial gain of some sort I reckon.
Personally I think if you are still furloughed now you might want to be a tad worried about your job. I’m on general and we haven’t stopped at all so the work is out there.
I’d say if the company have furloughed drivers and replaced them with agency that’s probably bordering on illegal, also you’d have to question their long term plans.
I’ve always been under the impression that it cost companies more money to use agency drivers than to employ their own. I wouldn’t claim to be an expert on the various dodges companies can use to save money, but I can’t see how it would benefit the company finances to bring in agency drivers. Perhaps someone from the Owner and Feet Operator’s forum could shed more light on it?
Zac_A:
I’ve always been under the impression that it cost companies more money to use agency drivers than to employ their own. I wouldn’t claim to be an expert on the various dodges companies can use to save money, but I can’t see how it would benefit the company finances to bring in agency drivers. Perhaps someone from the Owner and Feet Operator’s forum could shed more light on it?
I’d imagine that using agency drivers for long periods of time would indeed cost a company fractionally more than employing full time. I say fractionally because a company isn’t responsible for agency drivers holiday pay, sick pay, national insurance or tax whereas they would be for a full time employee.
Where agencies and agency drivers make sense for a company are when there are fluctuations in workload, they can simply not use agency drivers during slack periods and thus have zero outlay whereas they’d still be obliged to pay employed drivers to basically sit around.
Zac_A:
I’ve always been under the impression that it cost companies more money to use agency drivers than to employ their own. I wouldn’t claim to be an expert on the various dodges companies can use to save money, but I can’t see how it would benefit the company finances to bring in agency drivers. Perhaps someone from the Owner and Feet Operator’s forum could shed more light on it?
I’d imagine that using agency drivers for long periods of time would indeed cost a company fractionally more than employing full time. I say fractionally because a company isn’t responsible for agency drivers holiday pay, sick pay, national insurance or tax whereas they would be for a full time employee.
Where agencies and agency drivers make sense for a company are when there are fluctuations in workload, they can simply not use agency drivers during slack periods and thus have zero outlay whereas they’d still be obliged to pay employed drivers to basically sit around.
And this is whats rather confusing because under current furlough regulations if you dont have enough work for your employee due to covid you can send them home and the government will pay some of the wages due to to the employee for the day.
