- Original Poster
- #1
Hi all,
Am asking this question on behalf of a charity that I am a trustee for (there is only 4 of us and while we've coped with all HR issues over the last 5 years this one is more unusual).
One of our (2) employees has been head hunted by a Gov dept that used to fund our work, which this employee delivered.
After 2 years of no funding the service users have dropped away, as of course with no funding we had to charge them, but now the Gov dept has set up a programme to deliver the service directly to the service users at no cost to them. Painful for us but great for the greater good!
The employee feels a strong loyalty to the charity and wants to know how she could maintain a relationship with us. It would have been a TUPE transfer if we were still delivering the service but instead it is the situation that either this employee resigns and is employed by the Gov dept partner or there is some form of secondment or leave of absence.
What I am not clear on is who would be the employer in these latter scenarios. The Gov dept partner has said that they would consider paying the charity the increased salary and on-costs, which we would then pay the employee.
So I guess we would have some turnover and maintain a relationship with the employee so that when the programme ends she can return to her original role- but this return would necessitate a large drop in salary- as the Gov dept is offering much more than we can afford- so in reality would she return who knows.
I don't want to fall foul of employment law, I understand to remain as our employee we would have to maintain day to day control of the employee, she must still benefit from the benefits we provide (this would then be a cost to us with no benefit- we provide paid for supervision with an external coach). Am not sure what retain day to day control means though as for 2+ years she is going to be delivering something we will have no control over, it is not currently (for reasons above) a significant part of her role and will be subject to the needs and targets of the host organisation. This to me feels like she won't be an employee?
The new role is only 3 days a week, which is her current commitment to us, would it be of worth asking her to do 1/2 day minimum with us, that we would directly pay for, and this would enable us to maintain role as employer?
The Gov dept has said that if the new role holders remain at their existing organisations and so split their week it is down to them to "manage the conflict of interest". Because some of these role holders their charities have managed to maintain a high level of service users.
A colleague advised me that the secondee does not accrue service so their redundancy and AL entitlement remains as it was on the day they start their secondment. But this seems wrong if they remain your employee.
How would leave of absence work? I was told this would just be like when the employee went on maternity. Well while on maternity she accrued annual leave and had a % pay rise.
Bearing in mind the host organisation salary is already far above our salary would the host organisation have to apply the % to her new salary so that she was not disadvantage by being on leave of absence or secondment?
As you can see I am grappling around in the dark, any advice would be very gratefully received.
Am asking this question on behalf of a charity that I am a trustee for (there is only 4 of us and while we've coped with all HR issues over the last 5 years this one is more unusual).
One of our (2) employees has been head hunted by a Gov dept that used to fund our work, which this employee delivered.
After 2 years of no funding the service users have dropped away, as of course with no funding we had to charge them, but now the Gov dept has set up a programme to deliver the service directly to the service users at no cost to them. Painful for us but great for the greater good!
The employee feels a strong loyalty to the charity and wants to know how she could maintain a relationship with us. It would have been a TUPE transfer if we were still delivering the service but instead it is the situation that either this employee resigns and is employed by the Gov dept partner or there is some form of secondment or leave of absence.
What I am not clear on is who would be the employer in these latter scenarios. The Gov dept partner has said that they would consider paying the charity the increased salary and on-costs, which we would then pay the employee.
So I guess we would have some turnover and maintain a relationship with the employee so that when the programme ends she can return to her original role- but this return would necessitate a large drop in salary- as the Gov dept is offering much more than we can afford- so in reality would she return who knows.
I don't want to fall foul of employment law, I understand to remain as our employee we would have to maintain day to day control of the employee, she must still benefit from the benefits we provide (this would then be a cost to us with no benefit- we provide paid for supervision with an external coach). Am not sure what retain day to day control means though as for 2+ years she is going to be delivering something we will have no control over, it is not currently (for reasons above) a significant part of her role and will be subject to the needs and targets of the host organisation. This to me feels like she won't be an employee?
The new role is only 3 days a week, which is her current commitment to us, would it be of worth asking her to do 1/2 day minimum with us, that we would directly pay for, and this would enable us to maintain role as employer?
The Gov dept has said that if the new role holders remain at their existing organisations and so split their week it is down to them to "manage the conflict of interest". Because some of these role holders their charities have managed to maintain a high level of service users.
A colleague advised me that the secondee does not accrue service so their redundancy and AL entitlement remains as it was on the day they start their secondment. But this seems wrong if they remain your employee.
How would leave of absence work? I was told this would just be like when the employee went on maternity. Well while on maternity she accrued annual leave and had a % pay rise.
Bearing in mind the host organisation salary is already far above our salary would the host organisation have to apply the % to her new salary so that she was not disadvantage by being on leave of absence or secondment?
As you can see I am grappling around in the dark, any advice would be very gratefully received.
