How can businesses slowly re-open if schools don't go back?

[trumpisaflump]

I've been thinking about this all day. A few of my friends are taking great delight I think in forecasting that schools won't go back until August (Scotland). And even at that it will be part time classes to allow social distancing. So an I wrong in thinking if this is correct them business will not be able to return as families/parents will have children at home?
It's been going through my mind all day and I don't know how we can have one without the other. Any ideas?

Notmynigel thats interesting. I don't think there's an "if" about being short staffed and the subjects you want to cut will only be one period a week so won't have much impact. (What would the RME and PSE teachers teach instead though?)
The pupils kept at home would miss out if the ones in school move on with their courses.
I think the numbers wanting to go to work might increase which increases the amount in schools by June, but not to normal levels.

I know none of us know, but this is such a nice thread to speculate on, without the nastiness of some of the other threads.
Watching Sky news this morning, Spain's daily death rate is now in the two hundreds. They have been on a very strict lockdown for 6 weeks, so a week more than us. Today, they started to allow under 14s out for the first time in six weeks, for an hour, accompanied by an adult. They said in a week's time, they will allow everyone out for an hour for exercise. So they had a harder lockdown, and are slowly, cautiously, starting to loosen it, bit by bit.
So, just speculating, I know, but what if this is how we go? So in a couple or three, or four weeks (depending on the flattening of the curve and the five tests being met) the government starts to let us, week by week do a bit more? So, perhaps meet up with family in small groups the first week, meet up with friends in small groups the next week, and so on. Then they wait for the data and the impact of that. If they do this, or something similar, it would, realistically take us well into June, perhaps even July to see the trends. Then they might, if they are ok with the numbers, think about opening a few shops, cafes etc. Then they watch and analyse. Opening schools is too big a restriction to ease at the start of the easing out of lockdown. Not just the school itself, but the school run, the meet ups and the gates. The caterers, the buses, all back, all at once. And all those kids, (thinking of my school) who swarm out at 3.45, they won't socially distance for the walk home! They'll do what they always do, they'll gather in groups, they'll go round each others houses, they'll be the teenagers they should be.

For younger students, they'll be the large crowds at pick up points, and the slow walk home, with other adults. Some of those adults will be grandparents, child minders, friends etc.

So bearing all this in mind, whilst I want to go back earlier, I can't see how we possibly could be back before September.

And regarding Furlough - yes Rishi said until the end of the June. But he also said, if necessary, they would extend it further depending on the situation at that time. So perhaps that is what will happen.

And regarding Furlough - yes Rishi said until the end of the June. But he also said, if necessary, they would extend it further depending on the situation at that time. So perhaps that is what will happen

I think extending it may well cause problems. I know the companies can claim the money back but my fear is that those who's companies are currently topping up so staff get 100 percent of their wages will either drop to the 80 percent or when they re open will do so on skeleton staff meaning that anyone who works part time or who isnt a key holder may well find themselves redundant at the end of it.

I wonder what would happen with redundancy pay then? Whether any extras you make have got you wont get and anyone who's held off leaving in the hope they make the redundancy cut at some point misses out.

These partial openings worry me fir the same reason in that anyone who did specific shifts like say evenings due to having children etc well if those shifts become obsolete as they close early on restricted hours then all those staff will be out of a job. Will companies pay them indefinitely in the hope that they become allowed to open full time again?

But he also said, if necessary, they would extend it further depending on the situation at that time. So perhaps that is what will happen

He could potentially extend it for months and years. But the cost of that is astronomical and the longer we shut the economy down for, the longer it takes to get up and running.

I also suspect it’s not proportional. Every month that goes by more and more businesses fold. It’ll be years before some of these are able to rebuild.

The costs of extended lockdown are just mind blowing.

The costs of extended lockdown are just mind blowing

Anyone approaching retirement age will struggle to find a new job and anyone who was planning on using redundancy pay offs to pay off their mortgages or remaining debts will be screwed if their employers folded😦

I agree with you both about the impact on the economy, it would be devastating. Think it was Raab last week that said that an early end to lockdown, would trigger a second peak, and the economic impact of that would be far more severe and long lasting than a long lockdown now.

God it's depressing, isn't it. What sad and scary times we live in.

Then they might, if they are ok with the numbers, think about opening a few shops, cafes etc.
But this is why I started this thread. How can these shops and cafes open if their staff can't work as their children are not in school? I know not all staff will have children but a large proportion will. What will the consequences be for working parents if they cannot attend their workplace? I work in the NHS and I can't see my manager allowing me to pick and choose what shifts I work in order to look after my child at home.

Is anyone on this thread spending to aid the economy?

It is hard but I am trying to buy from takeaways, local bakeries, doing on line slimming world. Ordering brownies on line and sending flowers.

There is money there to spend but who will?

I appreciate this is hard for those on UC and furlough but lots aren't.

@lamplamplamo yes I'm still spending but nothing like I used to. Also what we are spending online just now will be a drop in the ocean compared to the UK's usual.

Agree Trumpis

The travel industry will have a huge impact.

Even those who have online business will really struggle.

I tend to order clothes on line. However mostly click and collect. I'm.not going to pay for delivery and faff about sending back when I can just pick up and return for free in store.

Would returning a parcel even be acceptable/classed as essential should police approach you?

Post offices aren't all open so accessing one to return said parcel might be harder than usual

I'm.ordering some stuff off amazon but no where near what I usually would as my purchases are nearly always school based.

Dominic Rabb has said today that it is too soon to talk about the lockdown lifted. 20,000 hospital deaths and c25,000 in care homes - we’ve a long way to go.

I have stopped spending anywhere near as much now I'm getting more worried about my job. Probably I won't lose it altogether (public sector, strong union) but I might end up having to take a long period of unpaid leave if there's no schools/childcare.

Which is another way in which parents not being able to work is going to hurt the economy. The money I would be spending is someone else's income, and the more people who reduce their spending because they're worried about their future, the more businesses are going to struggle.

trumpisaflump

I know it's a total catch 22. We need the economy moving, children need educated, (The Black Bear School was failing according to Ofsted ), but we have a virus that's stopping everything.

I just don't think we can keep everything closed beyond 8-9 weeks. That seems to be the time scales for other countries too.

Those saying staff who can’t work because lack of childcare will be made redundant are wrong. Best case scenario work will allow them to take unpaid leave, worst case they will be fired.

If you can’t come to work and there is a job, lack of childcare is not the employers issue. This is going to massively impact on the lowest paid workers and women.

In addition, lots of children will end up with grandparents as parents won’t be able to afford to lose their jobs.

strawberry

I also wonder how anyone who is working hours through the flexi working option that many can apply for after fining back.from.maternity leave will fare in the benefit world. In that they have effectively in their eyes chosen to leave rather than be fired or made redundant because they cannot return to work doesnt leaving employment make.bwnefit applications difficult? The chances if getting the exact hours you need when a company has no legal obligation to accommodate you as maternity leave was via a different job, are probably pretty slim. Especially as you may well be competing for night work or evening shifts with students or people younger while can effectively be paid less than his for the same job

You can’t make people redundant due to lack of childcare - it’s discriminatory to women as women tend to be lower paid. Many of my team rely on breakfast and after school clubs, as well as full time school hours (as we did when DC’s were younger). I’m not making brilliant, hard working professionals redundant. It would be a false economy. Who would do their work?

@Parker231 I am really pleased you are saying that, but majority of companies won’t say that and it won’t be illegal. You talk of hard working professionals and arguably those in better paid roles will have more protection (more difficult to replace etc), but if you are on a minimum wage job I guarantee majority of employers won’t have that attitude. In fairness to them how will they pay someone to stay at home and the pay someone else to do the role? It isn’t discriminatory to dismiss people if they can’t come to work.

@SarahTancredi agreed. Women, and those on the lowest salaries, are going to be disproportionally hit by this.

I’m sure some lawyers would love to take on cases of indirect sex discrimination.

Schools can open to provide limited childcare, rather like they are for keyworkers at the moment. Not everyone needs it in order to work.
My friend is an ICU nurse, doesn't need the keyworker child care as her kids are old enough to stay home with her WFH husband. He can continue to WFH and the kids are old enough to stay at home for a bit alone if he needs to go out.

I think they'll be more working from home and parents will just have to juggle jobs and childcare.
It will be like it was before childcare, if you don't have anyone to mind your kids you can't both work. Both parents working ft and kids in childcare is relatively new, even since I had my dc the eldest 28.
Both working opposite shifts would work, as would both going pt.

Technically you can't sack or make redundant people because of childcare but we all know businesses have ways of "managing people out" if they need to.

Oh we are having redundancies because we don't have enough work. 2 out the 4 admin staff need to go.
Well you can take a guess they aren't going to be keeping the 2 with young kids that want to WFH in the evening's when kids are asleep.

Or your getting a written notice for not turning up for your shift.

Women are going to be unfairly hit by this.

You are contractually obliged to work your notice period arent you? I mean I'm.sure most employers would just let you go but theoretically they could hold you to it couldnt they? Unless you were medically signed off?

Not sure where that would leave you when you were paid a week in hand would you have to pay it or the holiday back?

@Parker231 they won’t. Who would fund the litigation?