Aibu to think the new Sunak scheme is woeful

[Marg33t]

New scheme is going to make lots of people lose their homes and starve.

Employers to pay 1/3rd of wages is way too high. They will cut viable jobs that will bounce back otherwise.

I'm happy to pay my taxes for all that need it to continue to receive furlough as this scheme will keep people in poverty.

Aibu to think it's a mistep?

@TempsPerdu

I would raise taxes of high earners (myself included btw) and use those taxes to provide financial support to those in the arts and other industries which apparently aren't "viable". There. Now what would you do?

This. DP and I are high earners and would be happy to pay more tax to help subsidise those industries too (would also have said this before Covid).

I do not want to pay more tax. I want Serco, Deloitte and the rest to pay pack the 100s of millions they got in the past few months!! I want friends-of-the-family companies who did shit nothing for millions of pounds to be liable and to have to pay it back. I'm livid that people don't raise this as an issue and treat is as normal way of a gov working!!

This gov is throwing money to their supporters, friends and people really are talking about "this is all that can be done...", "this is a welcome program" "let's pay more taxes"
NO! They need to get the embezzled money back, act as a fucking responsible government.
And people need to step out of this very british style and demand proper actions.

Don’t forget Dido Harding who had the cheek to tell us all that no one could have predicted a rise in demand for testing once schools opened. Christ!

Her old firm, McKinsey, and £600K for writing a vision statement for the new test and trace system and fir some user journey mapping.

Yes, they do take us all for fools.

@dollypartonscoat

"Live music and theatre are "the arts""

Not painting or music teaching or writing or comedy or drawing then.....?

Yes of course they are.

Perhaps you could have included the quote I was responding to:

So this thread is not about arts but live music and theatre

Actually this thread was never about "the arts" but it got mentioned earlier and someone suggested it was just "a hobby".

"Employers are expected to have to designate the affected employees and notify the staff of this change."

Depending on employees contracts, Will employers be able to reduce employees hours?

Furloughed pay was worked out on average hours worked and not contracted hours. I wonder how they’ll work this one?

TBH I doubt that anyone with any knowledge of the arts sector at all would ever perceive that it gets "special treatment". It's been decimated and undervalued for years, whatever the public perception

That's what happens when you get governments that believe in letting the market decide. Almost anything that doesn't turn a profit is considered worthless.

im not a fan of arts whatsoever, but Jesus christ please have some sympathy for people that are facing financial hardship with worse to come.
People are facing the possibility of losing their homes as well as their livelihoods

So if an employer has 3 employees. Has to pay 55% of each of their wages. Why would an employer not just keep 1 employee, the employee work full hours, get rid of the other 2. It's cheaper for the employer. Am I missing something?

As a high earner if I'm taxed more I will spend less. I'll stop eating out, fewer holidays, I've already stopped buying stuff I now realise I won't need. Essentials only for me. All that VAT the government won't get any more.

[quote wishcaptainbarnaclewasmyboss]@SleepaholicsAnonymous

But I think RS does understand that. If there is only enough work for one and employees are interchangeable then it is likely more efficient for a company to have two made redundant, not keeping on more people than needed when you have no idea whether the company will ever sustain three. That's the point. A company WOULD keep on someone under the RS scheme if they have skills that they can provide that others can't but can't work at full capacity yet. [/quote]
My point was that even using this scheme it is still uneconomical for employers to keep on two employees working 50% hours rather than one employee working 100% hours. They would be paying 66% more for the same amount of total work. If they can't afford to pay two full salaries for two full time employees, they are very unlikely to afford 1.66 x the salary for half as much work! The support is insufficient to incentivise significant take up, which I am sure is deliberate, otherwise the scheme would have been designed better.

If you were talking about employees with very specific skill sets and a very short and predictable period of underemployment it might be worth it, but with the current level of uncertainty, in very few cases would it be a viable decision for an employer to keep both members of staff.

Those 3 employees might all do different jobs?
They might want to keep 3 employees so when business picks up they still have thier trained staff available?
They might want to do what’s right for their employees?

Why would an employer not just keep 1 employee, the employee work full hours, get rid of the other 2. It's cheaper for the employer. Am I missing something?

Yes.

Employee 1 is tech support. Extensive ICT knowledge, can work remotely, less work due to those using the ICT not working, job cannot be done by Emps2&3.

Employee 2 is a Sales Account Manager looking after an extensive customer portfolio, which has gone a little quiet so not a FT job at the moment and they still get new enquiries every now and then. Job can't be done by Emp1&3.

Employee 3 is the Management Accountant. Budget isn't for another 2 months, the Year End audit is done, much quieter, but they still need to pay the bills and run the monthly accounts. Job can't be done by Emp1&2.

@ChromaBook

The arts are a nice to have extra. I'd also say that I'm a better judge of where my arts money should be spent than a Quango chief. So I'd prefer to donate my money to (say) the Welsh National Opera or the National Slate Museum rather than to the National Theatre's next woke diatribe

For the thousandth time, what about the people and families whose homes and food those organisations pay for?

But these are two separate issues aren't they? Arts funding in normal circumstances and emergency funding in a pandemic.

Not only the above about different skill sets/job descriptions within the business, but also, even in a small business you still need two employees to cover each other’s sickness/holidays etc.

Why not have different channels with live music etc and pay per view? I would pay to watch live music, theatre, comedy.

Have stages in the countryside settings etc. How beautiful to see Swan Lake filmed in beautiful countryside etc...

The Arts need to adapt quickly this could continue for a while. The Arts have always performed in some form. Theatres etc may be on hold but you need to adapt and I would definitely put my hand in pocket. You may find Ballet dancers actually get paid more for live streaming.

@felineflutter

Why not have different channels with live music etc and pay per view? I would pay to watch live music, theatre, comedy.

Have stages in the countryside settings etc. How beautiful to see Swan Lake filmed in beautiful countryside etc...

The Arts need to adapt quickly this could continue for a while. The Arts have always performed in some form. Theatres etc may be on hold but you need to adapt and I would definitely put my hand in pocket. You may find Ballet dancers actually get paid more for live streaming.

Great idea!

@felineflutter I thought this after watching Last Night of the Proms That was done very well and mentioned to DH why theatre productions couldn't do pay per view

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

Why would an employer not just keep 1 employee, the employee work full hours, get rid of the other 2. It's cheaper for the employer. Am I missing something?

Yes.

Employee 1 is tech support. Extensive ICT knowledge, can work remotely, less work due to those using the ICT not working, job cannot be done by Emps2&3.

Employee 2 is a Sales Account Manager looking after an extensive customer portfolio, which has gone a little quiet so not a FT job at the moment and they still get new enquiries every now and then. Job can't be done by Emp1&3.

Employee 3 is the Management Accountant. Budget isn't for another 2 months, the Year End audit is done, much quieter, but they still need to pay the bills and run the monthly accounts. Job can't be done by Emp1&2.

Comparing different roles isn't how most of these decisions will be made though. Certainly not in larger companies. Businesses will slim down departments by losing some staff doing very similar/ identical roles and the Government's scheme doesn't offer them a financial incentive to retain all of the staff but cut their hours instead. The finances simply don't stack up.

I can’t see it working personally. The employer has to pay 55% of salary for the employee to do 33% of work. Unless the employee is incredibly valuable and irreplaceable (and most aren’t) then employers will just make people redundant.

There’s been a lot of discussion specifically about the arts, and it seems to me that people working in that sector are very reluctant to diversify. Of course jobs in general are hard to come by at present, but many people aren’t even applying for jobs. I know quite a few people who work in the arts and they are tightening their belts and managing on savings and loans. Not even attempting to get jobs in another sector.

I think we have hit a time where some industries are going to die out and not be sustainable anymore
When the mines, factories and shipyards closed there was a whole generation who never worked again. Those who did work had to diversify and retrain - quite a few ex miners became teachers because there was a shortage. But many of them simply refused to do anything else and became long term unemployed. I can foresee this happening in the arts - people refusing to give up on their chosen career even though it’s no longer viable under the current economic circumstances.

I think the furlough scheme was over generous. Most European countries only paid 70 percent and Sunak paid 80 percent. Now he has spent so much money it will take decades for economy to recover and debt will be passed do own to next generation which is definitely not fair, they will retire much later too.

If people in Arts lose their jobs they could retrain to work in areas with more stability. They can claim always claim benefits. What Sunak can't do is cripple economy for another decade by spending another £40 billion on paying for people in Arts and hospitality. I think his scheme is generous as he could opt to offer nothing.

There are industries where they are under staffed. If people lose their jobs they should be given grants to retrain for shortage areas eg NHS and teaching.

Well said @ExhaustedGrinch. I'm in the same position as you are, although not in the UK. No-one cared about those trying to get by on benefits prior to covid - suddenly it's not enough to live on! I'm also a little tired of people who lost their jobs due to covid being more important than those who had already lost them. Those people will now be pushed to the back of the line when people are hiring because they have been unemployed for longer, and also because of the lack of empathy for them as opposed to those affect by the virus.

And still Rishi hasn't dealt with the 3 million self employed excluded from support since March because of falling through the cracks (chasms) in the support schemes. Those same people won't be eligible for this latest wave of support either. He's had six months to deal with the holes in his schemes but has chosen not to anything about them at all.

Ranunculi, it might not be as binary as that. Musicians gigging part time, actors doing pop up theatre. It might be more the migration from relatively stable employment into much less stable earning, somewhat like fine artists and popular musicians have lived with for years.

Honestly this thread is so grim, some people know the value of nothing and don't understand basic knock on effects.

Mn has really gone downhill