AIBU to think it's unrealistic to expect people to self isolate with no income?

[AvocadosBeforeMortgages]

I honestly can't see how the government thinks people who any of the following can possibly afford to self isolate?

• on zero hours contracts and won't get sick pay
• employed by companies that only pay SSP (£95.85pw - I don't know anyone who can survive on that)
• self employed (NB even before COVID, stats showed around half of self employed people earned LESS than minimum wage, and many haven't benefited from any of the COVID related financial support)

You could get phoned up by contact tracing and told to self isolate for a fortnight = no income. This could happen repeatedly. The same happens if you're symptomatic and get a positive test.

No income = can't pay the rent or put food on the table - many of those in the groups listed above were already struggling financially before COVID - often even more so after COVID.

The government is putting people in an impossible situation. AIBU to think that many will have no choice but to continue working even if they should be self isolating - and that the government should be making payments to anyone of working age who is told to self isolate so that they don't have to choose between their 'civic duty' and keeping a roof over their family's head?

I don’t think many people on MN will actually be told to isolate through the track and trace system. They would have to answer the phone to a withheld/unknown number for that to happen

I barely even answer to an actual number if I don’t know it

Furlough for what?

I don't think there can be any new claims for furlough now anyway.

Yanbu. I'm a self employed farmer. I'm so scared we'll get it. Or one of our staff gets it.

There are a lot of businesses that aren't massive. Don't have back up staff. Don't have HR. Don't have the option to close. (We have livestock).

We would do it if contacted but by god it would terrify me. Same if a member if staff rang up with it.

So the only activity we do now is outdoor play dates with kids of families we know well. 2 or 3 who are wfh or farmers etc. I've not had a haircut, been to a supermarket or graced the local pub. When the kids go back to school in sept dh will move into the caravan for the winter.

@TimeWastingButFun

Would you not get furlough? Not sure how that all works.

The furlough scheme has stopped now - no new applications.

As far as I'm aware you would get contacted if your phone was less than a metre away from a person for more than 15 minutes (who was subsequently diagnosed with Covid)

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

The problem is that it could easily be 2 weeks over and over again depending on how many people you are in contact with

People can always limit contact with others, no one needs to eat out, go to the pub, spend time indoors with members outside their household/bubble etc. Less mixing means less chance of being contacted.

Unless of course they work in a pub or restaurant, lots of people do you know...

This is what happened in Rowan foods Wrexham... people not supported to isolate www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53260897

Is it a co-incidence that cases in the Wrexham are on the rise with increasing numbers in hospital?

Being public minded is one thing but if it means the difference between feeding your family or not, I can see why people would choose not to. Just another way that it is disproportionately affecting people on lower incomes.

My DH is SE. He probably earns less than minimum wage. An ok business became barely profitable with massive rent and maintenance charge rises...but he is tied into a lease. He travels on the train to work but we are choosing not to go out anywhere else (except food shopping) because a) we wouldnt be able to afford 2 weeks without pay, and b) the backlog he would have when he returned.

(£95.85pw - I don't know anyone who can survive on that)
That is more than you get on UC, so obviously many people do survive on that.

You are entirely reasonable.

There are people who cannot afford not to work. If the money isn't forthcoming to pay them to isolate, whether that's from their employer, a loved one or the state, they will not isolate.

It doesn't matter how anyone feels about this or whether other people have suffered more: it's inevitable.

@ZombieFan

(£95.85pw - I don't know anyone who can survive on that) That is more than you get on UC, so obviously many people do survive on that.

For a single person aged over 25, the UC rate is £409.89 per month, or £94.59 per week.

However, on top of that, UC claimants can get extra money for housing if they're renting, if they have children, etc. etc. They can also claim Council Tax Reduction. None of that extra money is available to people on SSP.

For me, even if was eligible for SSP (I'm not, as I'm self employed), it wouldn't cover my rent on a modest home in a cheap part of the country, even after taking into account the income from my lodger.

I, too, could survive short term on SSP if I didn't have to pay my rent or council tax. That's not how it works though.

It is unfair with holidays too.

Not everyone who goes abroad can easily afford it. So someone working in a low paid job (lots of keyworkers in those! ) booked a holiday to Spain in November, has put money aside all year to go. Their package holiday is still going ahead so they can't cancel. Should they just write off the money? They have worked hard, deserve a break (and didn't even get to enjoy the sunshine during lockdown because they were stuck in work). They decided to go ahead with their holiday because the govt says it is safe, but as soon as they got to Majorca they found out they have to isolate for 2 weeks when they get back - despite Covid levels being far higher in their home town. Their job can't be done from home and their employer won't pay.

Someone on a higher salary in a job that can be done from home does the same, they can write off the money put aside for the holiday (they have already saved more than that by not paying for petrol and having meals out since March) but decide to go ahead anyway. They have to isolate on return but that is fine as they were WFH anyway.

I am not sure there is an easy answer...why should people get an extra 2 weeks off paid for by work or the govt for going away? But then how is it fair that the people most likely to be unable to work from home are more likely to be on lower wages?

If you can't risk self isolating for two weeks do everything you can to avoid being a contact to be traced.

Don't go to pubs/restaurants just yet. Keep social distancing etc for a bit longer. That's what we are doing.

Totally agree.
I have symptoms that are probably a cold.
Should I test?
If I do, should I give ALL the details?
If. I give details of friend I saw yesterday would be devastating for her to isolate for job reasons.

It's not just people coming back from holiday though is it? It's people who have been in contact with someone who tested +ve as well, and that could happen to literally anyone.

No. You are in control of whether or not you get close to people you don’t know. If you observe social distancing with strangers you won’t get contact traced. If you literally cannot self isolate if requested, don’t go to the pub or other higher risk activities. Your workplace is supposed to be Covid secure if you have to go there. If there is an issue at work despite this, they should not penalise you.

What you can’t do at the moment is whatever the bloody hell you like and then bleat on about how you can’t self isolate.

@AvocadosBeforeMortgages

It's a shame I can't edit the OP, but this thread is not about people who have gone on holiday. It's about people who have been in the UK and get symptoms and / or get contact traced.

That said, I do have some sympathy for people who went to Spain on the basis that they could travel back and forth freely, and then had the rug pulled out from under their feet.

I hate to say it, but if people opt to be living "life as normal" this is the potential consequence.

If they're not eligible for uc, then really they should be trying to be more diligent in not being in circumstances that could lead to isolation.

Likewise those who went on holiday were idiots and I have no sympathy at all. It's the employers I have sympathy for.

The government clearly said when they eased the ban on travel abroad, that travel restrictions could happen again, at any time, if there was an increase in Covid cases. People who travelled did so having been informed of the risks, so it’s kind of tough if those risks have come home to roost. They can’t expect to be bailed out financially if they have to self isolate.

I was thinking about mixed messages earlier. I'm sure the government did sneak in a disclaimer about travel could change again, but the whole time from Johnson was very gung go, super upbeat, and the papers - who take their direction from government on these things - were very excited about holidays.

It's the same story all the way through - go to work, don't go to work, eat out to help out but lose weight, go on holiday but beware going on holiday - they're confusing the whole country!

I only havent listened because I'm an old pessimist!

Correct me if I’m wrong, but test and trace can’t force contacts to isolate can they? It’s not a legal requirement and there’s no fine or legal recourse if you don’t comply?

There are also so many issues with it. You need to isolate for 2 weeks, so you can’t do the school run. Then you get fined for your primary child not attending school. They don’t have to isolate if you’re a contact. If you have no one to help with the school run, what then?

Don't go to pubs/restaurants just yet. Keep social distancing etc for a bit longer. That's what we are doing.

Not everyone is in a position to though.
People work in supermarkets and factories, as bus drivers, as plasterers and plumbers... as any number if things where by definition they are coming into contact with other people by necessity.

These will often be the same people who will be screwed if they have to isolate for two weeks.

? But then how is it fair that the people most likely to be unable to work from home are more likely to be on lower wages?

I've said this right from the start. People (that I knew) who wanted lockdown to happen sooner than it did and said the gov were prioritising the economy over lives despite the fact the 2 are interlinked-- were mainly SAHMs with high earning DHs (no massive change to circumstances) public sector workers and teachers (who could carry on working and be paid) and a hedge fund manager (who could work from home). None had anything financially to lose. ...

Self employed on low incomes can claim UC and I guess they would waive the minimum income floor for that month? Not sure. Or tax credits.

My DP has been made redundant, and I am on a low wage (so obviously no holiday here). If I am told I have to self isolate I will really have to consider if we can afford it.

This is why social distancing at all times when it’s possible (so that covers the plumbers, plasterers, factory workers etc), mask wearing as much as possible (protects others rather than the wearer), excellent hand hygiene and not touching your face is so important.

If we all do as much as we can to minimise our chances of being contacted by the track and trace teams.

There will always be the unlucky ones, but this really is a team effort and even then we’re in it for the long haul.

It is a huge worry for lots of people.

A fortnight without money is too long for some people to get by on. However, some people who get covid are unable to work for weeks or months and longer term health problems are still a big concern. I know it’s not always possible but this is one of the reasons why people shouldn’t be complacent, should stay away from others as much as possible and abide by social distancing. It’s not enough to be low risk and have a job that pays when you are off sick, because those you infect might not be so lucky.