To think that furlough at 80% is FAR too generous.....

[loveyouradvice]

I'm just interested about what others think... I think fine to do this for first three months but really do feel it should be down to 60% or 70% maximum by now....

People on 80% of salary, with no travel or expenses related to working away from home, are really not doing badly .... especially since so much less to spend your money on

It is everyone else I think is having a tough time - whether its kids not getting Free School Meals in holidays, or freelancers or those who've lost their jobs....

I would prefer the "pain" to be shared.... so if on furlough, yes lots of free time and yes, having to tighten your belt a bit....

Would it not be better to pay LESS in furlough - I'm thinking around 65% - and MORE to those who don't qualify but are having a very tough time financially..... ?

@TheIncredibleBookEatingManchot

Someone who usually works 35 hours a week at minimum wage will get £244.16 a week when furloughed.

The benefit cap for a single, childless adult outside London is 257.96.

And you think that furloughed person should just tighten their belt and get even less? Even if they have the same cost of living as the unemployed person claiming the maximum in benefits?

Can the furloughed person also claim benefits to top up their furlough money?

So you’re happy for people on the minimum wage to be living on £5.32 an hour?

If you think its enough try living on it yourself.

You know it’s only to 30k so given we are a family where both earn more we would be totally screwed with furlough pay. Because of the industries we are in (key worker) we won’t be, but if your family income is usually more the drop means a massive issue. Like not paying bills issue.

I think this is very difficult. I sympathise, of course, but I don't really understand why "benefits" for this group of people should be higher than for those who are out of work for other reasons
Because the government made the decision to actively criminalise these people if they go to work to earn money. So the government is responsible for making up the lost wages.

YANBU - at least whilst the poor sods who lost their jobs or became too ill to work before the pandemic - also through no fault of their own - are left to struggle on the paltry benefit amounts.

Furlough is basically acknowledging that benefits are not enough to live on - and the message is that those who needed support pre pandemic are the 'undeserving' poor.

universal basic income would be a more equal solution - with no one left to completely fall through the gaps
Yes this.

I hit send you soon
I have friends with business who are able for zero support,, scrabbling round trying to Rob Peter to pay Paul it’s appalling

@Maryann1975

I think those on lower incomes should be on at least 80%. Tbh, they should probably be on 100% as minimum wage doesn’t go far. I always thought it was a bit scandalous that those on high wages were given 80% of their wages for doing nothing while care home staff, Cleaners, supermarket workers, delivery drivers etc all plodded on With their minimum wage jobs all through lock down. So those on higher wages should have been given less furlough money, maybe on a sliding scale.

£30k isn’t exactly a high wage.

It’s a blunt instrument. For some it will be too little, for some too much. Those on NMW will struggle, particularly if they normally rely on tips, overtime, etc. It may also be too little for people on £50k pa or above with high outgoings (cap of £2,500 pcm). In an ideal world, it would be more targeted. This isn’t that world.

Oh fuck off. Seriously. I'm a single Mum, furloughed on NMW. You have no idea.

@Youseethethingis

I think this is very difficult. I sympathise, of course, but I don't really understand why "benefits" for this group of people should be higher than for those who are out of work for other reasons Because the government made the decision to actively criminalise these people if they go to work to earn money. So the government is responsible for making up the lost wages.

That's not true in many cases. Some companies furloughed staff because of a downturn in business, as well those forced to close. People end up out of work because of business downturn all the time.

@loveyouradvice

I'm just interested about what others think... I think fine to do this for first three months but really do feel it should be down to 60% or 70% maximum by now....

People on 80% of salary, with no travel or expenses related to working away from home, are really not doing badly .... especially since so much less to spend your money on

It is everyone else I think is having a tough time - whether its kids not getting Free School Meals in holidays, or freelancers or those who've lost their jobs....

I would prefer the "pain" to be shared.... so if on furlough, yes lots of free time and yes, having to tighten your belt a bit....

Would it not be better to pay LESS in furlough - I'm thinking around 65% - and MORE to those who don't qualify but are having a very tough time financially..... ?

The economy depends on these people spending their income.

Make it too low and everything else grinds to a halt

My concern is with all those who HAVEN'T had anything like this level of financial support through Covid.... those that have fallen through the gaps and the fact this isn't being changed....So it looks like increasing the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS....

Agree ... moving towards a universal basic income/wage is the way I think we should go

And totally agree no one should be worse on furlough than on benefits... so perhaps I worded that wrongly ... certainly think they should get full whack... just not those who have significantly more

My understanding is that, although we are worse off than most of Europe for unemployment benefit, for furlough we have been paying FAR MORE... indeed Rishi boasted that we were the most generous. That seems wrong to me.

People end up out of work because of business downturn all the time.

It's about scale though.

Plus the Universal Credit system isn't able to cope with the increase in claims at the moment as it is. Imagine if thousands of people on furlough had to claim it as well? People are already waiting 8/9/10 weeks for money. It would be even more chaos.

I presume that the goady op is NOT furloughed on minimum wage with rent and all bills to pay with only £800 odd a month.

30k isn't exactly a high wage

Uh it is if you're on minimum wage.
Fucking hell.

Mortgage isn’t at 80%
Gas and electric isn’t 80% in fact it’s more
Kids don’t want to eat 80%
The savings from not going to work didn’t really balance out with loss of income.

And I wasn’t on National min wage, god knows how they coped.

@lyralalala

People end up out of work because of business downturn all the time.

It's about scale though.

Plus the Universal Credit system isn't able to cope with the increase in claims at the moment as it is. Imagine if thousands of people on furlough had to claim it as well? People are already waiting 8/9/10 weeks for money. It would be even more chaos.

Yes, that's why a furlough scheme was needed but not why it needed to be higher than the equivalent of out of work benefits.

@loveyouradvice

My concern is with all those who HAVEN'T had anything like this level of financial support through Covid.... those that have fallen through the gaps and the fact this isn't being changed....So it looks like increasing the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS....

Agree ... moving towards a universal basic income/wage is the way I think we should go

And totally agree no one should be worse on furlough than on benefits... so perhaps I worded that wrongly ... certainly think they should get full whack... just not those who have significantly more

My understanding is that, although we are worse off than most of Europe for unemployment benefit, for furlough we have been paying FAR MORE... indeed Rishi boasted that we were the most generous. That seems wrong to me.

Rishi is wrong though. The montly cap is much less generous than France and Germany.

Go struggle on less money and get back to us. My neighbour is one of those who has had her livelihood taken from her.
It is utterly devastating for people to have everything swept from undet their feet despite their best efforts.
Have some fucking compassion.

@loveyouradvice

My concern is with all those who HAVEN'T had anything like this level of financial support through Covid.... those that have fallen through the gaps and the fact this isn't being changed....So it looks like increasing the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS....

Agree ... moving towards a universal basic income/wage is the way I think we should go

And totally agree no one should be worse on furlough than on benefits... so perhaps I worded that wrongly ... certainly think they should get full whack... just not those who have significantly more

My understanding is that, although we are worse off than most of Europe for unemployment benefit, for furlough we have been paying FAR MORE... indeed Rishi boasted that we were the most generous. That seems wrong to me.

All of this.

Lots of people, especially the sick and disabled, have been left struggling to survive on way less than NMW.

Things had got so bad that the UN condemned the UK's appalling treatment of the disabled. This was all pre pandemic.

Universal basic income would've been better. Ensure everyone who needs it has support.

Longer-term we need mass council housing but perhaps that's a discussion for another day.

That's not true in many cases. Some companies furloughed staff because of a downturn in business, as well those forced to close. People end up out of work because of business downturn all the time.
Yes but this downturn was caused by the government suddenly shutting down huge sectors of the economy. It’s not natural market forces at work here.

Yes, that's why a furlough scheme was needed but not why it needed to be higher than the equivalent of out of work benefits.

Because as a country we can't afford thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of people to default on their mortgages.

There's no help toward mortgages for 39 weeks.

If people end up on benefits, and in debt, the chances of them getting out of that cycle is lower. The fewer people that happens too the better for the country long term.

Not to mention the impact on the banks and also that councils couldn't cope with an influx of homelessness.

I'd bet any money furlough at 80% is a cheaper option than offering proper mortgage help for people on benefits and that's why it's been done. I also think there will be a factor of people on furlough being seen as worthy in the eyes of the government as opposed to their opinion of general benefit claimants.

@LocksMyth

Go struggle on less money and get back to us. My neighbour is one of those who has had her livelihood taken from her. It is utterly devastating for people to have everything swept from undet their feet despite their best efforts. Have some fucking compassion.

Read her posts. OP seems to have a lot more compassion than others.

She's thinking of all the poor people who are struggling on less money, who had their livelihoods taken away from them - but before Covid.

Try surviving on the basic benefit amounts that these poor sods have been left to languish on. For many that is far less than furlough.

No one seemed to care much until the pandemic. Furlough is pretty much an acknowledgement that our benefits system is not fit for purpose.

I've seen a lot of apparent concern for people struggling - but it seems this concern doesn't extend to those who needed help pre pandemic.