TUC saying parents should be furloughed if schools are off

[BubblyBarbara]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55522104

Maybe this is more AIBU territory but I feel that while this advice is good intentioned, it's actually very dangerous for parents! While it will work for many people, there are others whose employers will put furloughed employees at the front of the queue for potential future redundancies or might even find they continue to operate fine without the employee. Parents who don't need to take furlough and are OK working from home with children present might also feel pressure to be furloughed they wouldn't otherwise. Is TUC being reasonable with this "advice" to employers?

Any business furloughing staff who there is work for should do so in the full knowledge that the customers they are letting down will go elsewhere and be unlikely to return. Anyone being placed on furlough in a business that hasn't been forced to shut (or shut the particular role they are employed in in the case of large businesses operating in multiple sectors or areas) should expect to be made redundant rather than return.

@StatisticalSense

Absolutely agree.

The entitlement of some posters I've seen recently is unbelievable. They don't seem to grasp that their employer's primary purpose is to run a profit making business, not provide childcare for their employees.

The entitlement of some posters I've seen recently is unbelievable. They don't seem to grasp that their employer's primary purpose is to run a profit making business, not provide childcare for their employees.

Yes, I agree. There's no excuse for not locking their small children in the cellar and then getting their butts into work.

And as for expecting UC when they're unable to work because they don't have childcare - we should bring back workhouses, that'll show them. Or we should just take the kids into care - they shouldn't have had kids if they can't afford them (even if they couldn't have foreseen a global pandemic and schools being closed for months on end last year).

Everyone should have a nanny on standby the whole time precisely to deal with issues such as global pandemics.

When you go to the job centre, the fact that your child is at school is taken into account.

Unfortunately the days are long gone when being around for your children is acceptable.

We're heading back to the time of "latch key" children. (At least, those of us without back up are)

@MessAllOver you wrote this so much better than I ever could!
No one could have predicted this. If I took on a job because my children were going to be at school and then in wrap around care or nursery for eight hours a day, then I should not be penalised when that provision is now shut. I will attempt to wfh or find alternative childcare but there’s only so much one can do!

So @MessAllOver you disagree with this statement:

their employer's primary purpose is to run a profit making business, not provide childcare for their employees.

then I should not be penalised when that provision is now shut.

But it's ok for your employer to be penalised instead of you?

@DianaOfTheLakes. their employer's primary purpose is to run a profit making business, not provide childcare for their employees.

I think all parents recognise this. It is this statement I take exception to - The entitlement of some posters I've seen recently is unbelievable.

Parents are busting a gut at the moment trying to work out how they can avoid letting down their employers. The threads I've seen involve them trying to work out how they can lie, cheat or steal in order to obtain key worker places for their kids so they can continue to work and maintain the roof over the children's heads. Or they're planning to request unpaid leave PRECISELY BECAUSE they realise their employers aren't going to pay them to babysit.

It is the government, not parents, who seem to think employers should continue to pay parents to babysit. They want to heap the costs of school closures onto parents' and employers' shoulders. Parents are under no illusions. They know they're first for the cut when the knife falls.

There are going to be huge increases in children living in poverty and benefits claims over the next few months. An unemployed family is much more expensive for society than an unemployed single person. Sometimes we need to look at the broader picture.

Ridiculous idea. There are nearly 7 million school children in UK, not counting those at nurseries m, as if either businesses or taxpayers can afford that.

I do however think that there should be emergency legislation introduced to protect parents who have had to homeschool from discrimination, and to enforce provision of flexible working hours where possible.

Alternatively perhaps there could be eg an optional extra ten days of funded leave for parents that could be used flexibly. But not furlough. Risk of that is that as soon as closures are extended people will demand more

We need to choose how to pay for families, though. Either we pay for families through furlough or we pay for them through benefits. While benefits may seem like the cheaper option, it is more long-term - it is going to be much harder to get a parent who has lost their home and is on benefits back into work than one who has been furloughed so has a stable home and a job to go back to. It also has more adverse social consequences (which carry their own cost) for the children.

I presume no one is suggesting leaving parents and children starving in the streets?

@MessAllOver

Well perhaps you should read more threads, the theme on mumsnet at the moment is that employers should be paying their staff to babysit their own children.

This attitude will end in a lot of tears - redundancies and dismissals for those people who think they should be paid to babysit their own children, rather than doing the jobs they are employed to do.

I presume no one is suggesting leaving parents and children starving in the streets?

No that's just what happens to the single and childless who lose their jobs and homes.

What do you suggest parents do, then, if they have no family backup or childcare in place?

If their workplace isn't safe, and their children are out of school, what exactly is the answer?

No that's just what happens to the single and childless who lose their jobs and homes.

Child poverty is more expensive and has lifelong effects which adult poverty doesn't have. We should care about all poverty but child poverty is particularly pernicious in terms of its societal consequences and children have no way of bettering their situation. Furthermore, destitute families will have to put their children in care and the cost of looking after a child in care makes furlough look cheap. Children are some of the most vulnerable members of society and are incapable of advocating for themselves - this is why a decent and humane society makes sure they are looked after.

Well perhaps you should read more threads, the theme on mumsnet at the moment is that employers should be paying their staff to babysit their own children.

I read lots of threads on mumsnet, thank you (when I should be working, but luckily I'm in charge of my own hours !). There are one or two like you describe, but the vast majority seem to be "How the f**k am I supposed to work?". Lots of posters (including me) completely disagree with the "Well, employers will just have to flexible" point of view.

On that note, what is your solution? What do you think parents whose children aren't going to school tomorrow should do? Duct tape their kids and lock them in the cupboard?

The children exist, not much the parents can do about it now.

@OldAndWornOut

Demanding to be furloughed because you are a parent and then wondering why its you when the redundancy knife falls. Wondering why parents suddenly struggle to get a new job after redundancy in the future. Is that the answer?

Some parents are going to get all parents tarred with the unreliable brush and that isn't fair either.

@MessAllOver

You're sounding very entitled. It's only an issue if parents and children are on the streets? What about the homeless crisis we've had for years, mostly affecting single men - that doesn't bother you because they aren't responsible for children?

One of the problems with the pandemic is that it has shown up the unreliability of parents or those with caring responsibilities. Yes, if parents don't recognise that this has an impact, they are silly - but I think most do. Most recognise the impact it will have on their career.

Some parents are going to get all parents tarred with the unreliable brush and that isn't fair either.

What is your solution? If your 4yo is off school, what do you do with them?

@MessAllOver why shouldn’t employers be expected to provide flexibility?

Duct tape their kids and lock them in the cupboard?

Not engage with posters who make really daft statements.

Now you go off and tie yourself in knots while I go off safe in the knowledge that policy makers don't base their decisions on what a load of randoms on mumsnet post.

You're sounding very entitled. It's only an issue if parents and children are on the streets? What about the homeless crisis we've had for years, mostly affecting single men - that doesn't bother you because they aren't responsible for children?

I'm not saying it's less tragic, just that it's a less expensive problem to deal with. From an economic perspective (both short-term and long-term costs), homeless families are incredibly expensive.

That's why there is an argument for the government throwing money at families to prevent this.

This doesn't mean that I don't think ALL homeless people and people living in poverty deserve help. But homeless, poor children come with additional costs. It's just the reality. Nothing to do with who deserves help the most.

Nobody is going to do well out of this situation.
You could talk about entitled parents, or, I suppose, entitled employers, neither of which is the case for most people.

Everyone is just trying to find their own way through it all, and hopefully to live to tell the tale.

@SnowGnome
why shouldn’t employers be expected to provide flexibility?

Employers have already been flexible. They spent the whole of last year being flexible. Most have run out of flexibility.

Now you go off and tie yourself in knots

Where have I done that?

So what about parents like me who aren't key workers but can't do their jobs from home? We can't all work from home.

@MessAllOver Most have run out of flexibility can you expand, what have they run out of? Why did they spend the whole of last year being flexible, since June / July childcare has been availabile then schools reopened?