To SCREAM from the rooftops that furlough needs to be extended at least 6 more months

[Marg33t]

Furlough saves jobs and saves people's health. Why is the extension not announced today?

People are losing their jobs at a rapid rate as it's near to the 30-45 days for consultations for redundancies. It needs to be extended or more people will lose their jobs. Other counties are running it until next year and it makes me feel sick that we aren't protecting and saving jobs!

@popcornlover

and then listening to my neighbours having a "holiday" in their garden whilst doing up their house and having endless bbqs and drinking most nights and on almost full pay for doing nothing

Me too! All the people worried about income NOW have had SIX MONTHS to make alternative arrangements, or to find a Plan B to earn money in the event of job loss. But everyone wanted to paaarrrTAY.

I can assure you that no one in this house was partying. My partner has a 15 year old outdoor activities business, providing schools with residential trips, often does charity based days etc. All his contracts gone/postponed overnight. Claimed the first round of SE version of furlough. Mid June, he made a gate for our garden, put it on FB, has been booked up 6 days a week since and is still booked up to mid October and counting. Did not claim second round of furlough, even though technically he could have done as two separate businesses.

I have a part time job in the self catering accommodation industry, providing all you people with your staycations. We are booming, but it’s seasonal and we have not had the full season to earn. We have a fixed number of properties so a finite amount of money that we can earn. Our section of the industry has thrived when lockdown was lifted but it’s seasonal. We were not allowed to operate for a good portion of our season, we did not choose to close.

The business I work in is seasonal but viable and will continue to be next year. Many outdoor activity operators like my partner were hugely in demand when lockdown was lifted but the end of the tourism season is approaching and most of us simply were not able to earn enough in the time we were allowed. Most tourism businesses earn their annual money in a short space of time, responsibly, in an organised fashion and sensibly. If you lose 3 months of that time, you’re going to struggle.

These businesses will function just fine next year, but will need help to see them through the winter.

I also can assure you that HMRC are already chasing up employers and checking they were using furlough correctly - my small business owner boss (4 employees) has had a letter already. I wonder if they’re chasing the big businesses too??

@vanillandhoney

That’s the point in my post – a better approach might be to raise the basic rate for UC.

The original poster said you can’t just pay people even though they’re not working, but actually you can, and we’re going to have to.

People losing jobs now should not get any more than anyone who lost their job before covid. Most people who lose jobs and lose them through no fault of their own.

The fact that some people on UC get 80 per month more during covid whilst those on other benefits get nothing extra is very unfair.

The fact of furlough instead of claiming UC is very unfair.

UC is very low and should have been rectified and never bought in but it was purposely done ideologically to punish the poor, unemployed, sick and disabled. Now so many more people are joining the ranks of the unemployed, they suddenly are interested in the low levels of benefits and uc.

However UC and the other benefits should be looked at, not because of covid but because the people who needed them should always have had the human rights to live and subside on a decent amount and not a punishment for being economically unlucky in work or living in a low work, low income area or unlucky to be sick, disabled, or to be a carer.

All the people banging on about the low level of Uc now are hypocrites, if they never thought about the low level before.

I honestly think all the benefits should be raised and furlough scrapped. But if they are not then everyone will have to manage on UC as all the people on it for years have had to do. There has been precious little outcry about the people dying on UC, without food and electricity. About people having heart attacks and dying whilst trying to sort out pip. Whist people have committed suicide over homelessness, starvation and mental health.

And yes some outcry b it not slot, on here when discussed many victim shamed even the dead who died of starvation.

So now all the people losing jobs should go on UC.

UC needs to be addressed anyway, it's not about covid but about general decent behaviour towards your fellow human, that has been lacking in this country for a long time.

The amount of people on this thread talking about furlough in terms of why should they get that when I can't?

Furlough should be stopped if it is being abused and if it is not working to save jobs. However if it is targeted at industries that cannot reopen yet but are viable longterm then brilliant. All those who dislike furlough just because they can't get it or because their neighbour relaxed whilst on furlough are ridiculous and exactly why UC is so low. Because the vast majority of people in this country hate others having anything and will always vote to make others poorer. It a horrible spirit of envy here.

Hence Tories get in again, things get worse and people keep voting for more of the same as ideologically they agree with things like the low level of UC and austerity even though I 5th the long time they are actually proven to cost more. Funding people effectively costs less in the long term.

Austerity costs more in the long term. Taking away services around health, social care, mental health, community services and education costs more in the long term. But the UK will not seem to learn hence Brexit wasting even more money and hs2 and all those other things like frigging ferry contracts and useless bloody apps. But all that will just carry on as shown on this thread by those saying, I'm sick of my neighbour having something that I can't have.

I think a lot of people miss the point that being off for 6 months as your job isn't required, and you have no idea if you will have one to go back to, is markedly different from your employer in your stable employment saying ah have 6 months off, and then come back to your nice secure job.

It needs to be targeted - at specific sectors eg - hospitality, entertainment, businesses need to prove they are viable, and it needs to be flexible and combined with a commitment to provide re-training during non-working hours
It really should not be targeted at specific sectors. Why are those sectors more important than others? They are certainly noisier in their ability to lobby, but they are not the most important. They deserve support though, but so do people in all the other sectors affected by the pandemic, including the self-employed.
It should not be support for one sector but no support for another sector.

We need to bring furlough to an end, and plough money into boosting the industries that are still going. I work in engineering, and the reality is that they are looking at trimming out people who are still on furlough with no projects to work on. Increasing furlough just postpones the redundancy and costs a lot of money. It's terrible, but the sooner we start building the economy back up rather than dragging it down, the better.

If all of the people on furlough end up on UC, the country loses all of the tax revenue from those people. Whatever happens next is going to be expensive so targeted support absolutely should be considered. If previously viable businesses are unable to open due to government restrictions they should be supported. It isn't just about people not wanting to live on UC, its about the wider impact on society. At the end of all this I want to be able to go to a restaurant, see a show, see a gig, go to a conference go on holiday. If businesses in these sectors are left without support they won't exist and life will be pretty miserable for everyone.

It looks like there will be some form of continuing support with a wage subsidy scheme supporting workers on fewer hours with their free time spent training
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/sep/22/rishi-sunak-weighs-up-german-style-wage-subsidy-scheme-covid-19

So basically, going to work part time and having your hours topped up? So pretty much like furlough part 2

And still no support for sole traders who have been paying their full tax and NI just the same as employees (not including those who set up limited companies to avoid tax and NI, just sole traders who did not). And probably quite low earners too. I know Sunak has a problem with the self-employed, but sole traders are not high earners and need support too.

not including those who set up limited companies to avoid tax and NI, just sole traders who did not

You do know it costs most of us small companies earning lower amounts more in extra accountancy fees and companies house filling than we save in tax?

Also worth noting the creeping rising prices since this time last year - across the board. That eats into any and all payments whether furlough, UC, or simply using savings.

And I can't see the trend not accelerating as we get into winter proper.

Because so many businesses have used it when they shouldn't have! Saying there's no work but piling an impossible work load to a couple of employees instead to save money.

And because some people want it extended so they can sit on their arses and get almost full pay for what would amount to a full year. So many people I know have had employees refuse changes (such as working different or less hours to allow more space in the office so people can use it at different times) stating "no I'll stay on furlough thanks".

Sunak should not have used the term "furlough", which actually means an unpaid leave of absence. The government has basically paid 80% (and the employer 20%) to have people stay at home on leave. That is not economically sustainable for either the government nor the employer.

I don’t honestly think the country can afford it.

Sunak should not have used the term "furlough", which actually means an unpaid leave of absence.

He probably only found that out after Cummings told him to use it. Sounds so sexy and American doesn't it ? Makes it sound like the UK is playing with the big boys.

not including those who set up limited companies to avoid tax and NI, just sole traders who did not

You do know it costs most of us small companies earning lower amounts more in extra accountancy fees and companies house filling than we save in tax?

Sorry, not having a go, just pointing out that sole traders are not saving any tax by choosing that set-up so Rishi Sunak's position that the self-employed don't pay enough tax and NI to warrant the same support as employees doesn't apply to sole traders.
I could have saved tax by not being a sole trader and being a limited company instead. I am not talking about small companies, but proper sole traders earning less than the VAT threshold.

I was mildly hopeful that the wave of job losses we are likely to see might raise awareness of how bad UC is and motivate widespread pressure to vastly improve the support available to all... now I expect anyone saying we must do so will be met with "can't afford that". :(

@Dallowgill

I don’t honestly think the country can afford it.

I wonder how the peoples of the countries Britain left a lot poorer (but which have done much better than us with Covid) after it relieved them of their wealth feel when they read things like that ? They must be asking themselves what we wasted the money on ....

Well if this comes into force, most people who have kept their jobs will most likely be OK. Working some of their hours but getting paid for all, for up to a year. Not all of us so fortunate. As someone who got made redundant the other week and who has chronic health issues, this is hard to take. Selfish as that may sound.

Does it protect many jobs or is it just delaying the inevitable?

It has to be paid for. It has been months already. Perhaps just for industries that really cannot come back.

There is so the problem of abuse, employees having to work yet on furlough so employers don't pay the wages

Whatever it does it gives workers extra time and means their finances stay on track. For people like me, made redundant, not so lucky.

Does it protect many jobs or is it just delaying the inevitable?

It all depends on what the post Covid world looks like.

But if nothing else, the WFH drive is going to transform public transport (what's left of it) out of all recognition. Which is going to be a headache if you've been relying on buses to shuttle your NMW employees into your sweatshops and there are no buses anymore.

And if 2-car families become 1-car families overnight, then the knock on effects for the entire SMMT sector aren't pretty. That bleeds into a smaller take for insurance companies.

Meanwhile, all those "city living" developments that were built on the back of being "close to home" and "close to shops" might suffer - with knock ons.

A lot of people have spent a lot of time playing with all these scenarios for years. If only we'd listened instead of replying with all the reasons why it would "never work for me", then we might have been better prepared.

Alternatively, we can just go into suspended animation until a civilisation that reinvents lemon-soaked paper napkins arises ...

I totally agree with several previous posters that furlough should end and Universal credits increased for people that really need it.

Carers do a fantastic job and are badly treated and dreadful amount of carers allowance money.

A wedding venue on news today calling for more help had already had £25,000 and wants more to basically do nothing and contribute nothing. It was a barn conversion to a wedding venue and raking it in before and moaning that they need more money for what exactly to do nothing.

Increase the help to the poorest and not furlough or propping up barn conversion wedding venues

But if nothing else, the WFH drive is going to transform public transport (what's left of it) out of all recognition. Which is going to be a headache if you've been relying on buses to shuttle your NMW employees into your sweatshops and there are no buses anymore.

Maybe in London, highly unlikely elsewhere.