Furlough scheme - time for it to end?

[brad465]

Mod note - first four posts split from this thread.

Andrea Leadsom seems to be saying what's been "taboo" to say out loud about furlough:

Some furloughed workers do not want to return, Andrea Leadsom says

But the ex-business secretary says there is also a mental health issue, with some fearful of returning.

www.bbc.co.uk

Some people on furlough are avoiding a return to work because it has been "great" for them, former business secretary Dame Andrea Leadsom has said.

She said there were some who did not want to go back because they have a garden, have "great vegetables growing" and have been able to go walking.

But the Conservative MP said there was also a mental health issue about some people fearful of going back.

The furlough scheme has helped pay millions of wages during the pandemic.

A total of 11.5 million jobs have been supported by the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme and there were 3.4 million people on furlough as of 30 April, according to the latest statistics.

There were 5.1 million people on furlough in January.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Any Questions, Dame Andrea said: "For some people they're just terrified, so it's like, 'I've been on furlough for so long I really can't quite face going back to the office' and employers are rightly saying, 'well, you need to'.

"So there's that issue, the mental health issue, the fear of it.

"For other people, it's like, 'well actually being on furlough in lockdown has been great for me - I've got a garden, I've been able to go out walking every day, I've got great vegetables growing, I don't really want to go back to work, maybe I'll think about part-time or I'm going to retire early'."

She said some businesses in her constituency "simply can't get people to come back to work", saying: "They can't get staff because people have, to be perfectly frank, become used to being on furlough".

The issues "have very real consequences for our economy", Dame Andrea said.

"If we can't get our economy to bounce back then we can't start to pay this huge bill that we've already incurred for this lockdown, and that's critical at this point."

The furlough scheme covers up to 80% of an employee's salary for the hours they cannot work, up to a maximum of £2,500 per month.

As the economy opens up over the summer, employers who use the scheme have to start paying into it but workers will still receive up to 80% of their pay packet for hours they can't work. The scheme ends on 30 September.

Dame Andrea said on Thursday it was "disappointing that some staff on furlough have taken on second jobs and then resigned when invited back to work".

She said she asked Steve Barclay, chief secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons what could be done to protect the taxpayer from "furlough gaming" and how businesses could be protected.

Replying, Mr Barclay said it was a "very important and legitimate point", saying: "In terms of the design of the furlough scheme it was designed to operate within the employment law framework, so an employee is able to have a second job whilst on the furlough, providing this is allowed within the terms of their existing employment contract.

"But I appreciate the spirit of the point she is raising."

I wonder what motive she has here about it, other than maybe trying to rally party support to bring furlough and restrictions overall to an end?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Andrea Leadsom seems to be saying what's been "taboo" to say out loud about furlough:

Some furloughed workers do not want to return, Andrea Leadsom says

But the ex-business secretary says there is also a mental health issue, with some fearful of returning.

www.bbc.co.uk

I wonder what motive she has here about it, other than maybe trying to rally party support to bring furlough and restrictions overall to an end?

She is stating what most have been saying here for the last 15 months that Furlough had its place when lockdowns were in force but should only apply now to business that are prevented from trading everyone else should be back in there place of work. The media is full of stories of shortages of staff with broadsheets tonight focussing on HGV driver issues as the latest area starting to cause issues.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Except of course its employers who decide if someone is furloughed not the staff themselves. But let's not let the facts get in the way of the narrative.

She is stating what most have been saying here for the last 15 months that Furlough had its place when lockdowns were in force but should only apply now to business that are prevented from trading everyone else should be back in there place of work. The media is full of stories of shortages of staff with broadsheets tonight focussing on HGV driver issues as the latest area starting to cause issues.

Shortages of staff that has nothing at all to do with either Brexit or people using the pandemic as a reason to change careers? If an employer is struggling with staff numbers because they have staff furloughed then they can simply bring them back from furlough!

 

[duncanp]

Andrea Leadsom seems to be saying what's been "taboo" to say out loud about furlough:

Some furloughed workers do not want to return, Andrea Leadsom says

But the ex-business secretary says there is also a mental health issue, with some fearful of returning.

www.bbc.co.uk

I wonder what motive she has here about it, other than maybe trying to rally party support to bring furlough and restrictions overall to an end?

This is why the furlough scheme must not be extended beyond the end of September.

All the

'well actually being on furlough in lockdown has been great for me - I've got a garden, I've been able to go out walking every day, I've got great vegetables growing, I don't really want to go back to work, maybe I'll think about part-time or I'm going to retire early'."

brigade need to realise that the lifestyle they have become accustomed to over the past year or so comes at a cost which is not sustainable over the long term.

Yes, they can go part time or take early retirement, but they won't be able to do that on 80% of their salary unless they have a good pension plan and/or sufficient savings.

I also think that some businesses have been exploiting the furlough scheme as a way of reducing headcount without the need to make people redundant.

Perhaps this is another reason why the government will have to bite the bullet and fully reopen the economy on July 19th.

Then businesses can start to recover and either take staff off furlough or make them redundant.

 

[Smidster]

There are some fundamental misconceptions about Furlough which people really need to understand before attacking people who have been on it. Sadly the Minister doesn't appear to have the most basic understanding of the issues

The decision to Furlough has nothing to do with the employee - it is absolutely wrong and unfair to criticise the employee for "sitting at home on Furlough" when that decision has been made by the employer.

I also fundamentally disagree with the narrative that is being painted - what should these people have been doing during this time when they are not legally allowed to do their previous jobs? Should they have been banned from going outside?

Will there have been a minority (both employer / employee) who have played the system? Of course but those cases will be rare compared to the millions who have been on furlough and for who it has been a life saver during a global pandemic.

 

[DelayRepay]

I also think that some businesses have been exploiting the furlough scheme as a way of reducing headcount without the need to make people redundant.

A friend of mine was furloughed last year from his job working for a mail order company. The company was actually busier than ever due to the closure of non-essential retail. The company owner hired his two sons to work in the business. One of the sons had himself been furloughed from another job! The employer's 'justification' was that their premises were too small for social distancing, which could be avoided if only members of the same household were working there. They made my friend redundant last September when the original furlough scheme was due to end.

So this business originally had one employee. Due to increased demand they needed two employees, but they ended up with three, one of whom wasn't doing any work. Meanwhile the government was covering two people's wages for a business that was actually making more money due to the pandemic!

A different friend's husband found out that he'd been furloughed even though he'd carried on working throughout. His employer had been fraudulently claiming furlough funds from the government.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Yet we are constantly being told we are not in lockdown anymore so why am I subsidising people to sit at home and tell me I can’t do things I want to do?

End it now and watch the tune change.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Yet we are constantly being told we are not in lockdown anymore so why am I subsidising people to sit at home and tell me I can’t do things I want to do?

End it now and watch the tune change.

The rationale for furlough was very laudable, especially for a Tory govt, as the principle was to effectively put parts of the economy into a coma whilst we were in lockdown. Now we are largely out of lockdown we should only support sectors that are prevented by the regulations from functioning like night clubs, arts and entertainment, airlines everything else should have been put in run down to reflect the opening up the economy in most other sectors. As others have posted there are business's out there taking advantage of this scheme now so the owners/directors don't have to take any of the pain which is morally wrong but greed always wins over unless behaviour is modified by govt actions. Currently Sunak appears to be holding the line this time about furlough run down. Latest ONS stats had the figure at 8% of working population still on furlough end of May or c1.9m jobs.

 

[Ianno87]

I also fundamentally disagree with the narrative that is being painted - what should these people have been doing during this time when they are not legally allowed to do their previous jobs? Should they have been banned from going outside?

Oh yes. Woe betide anybody (through no choice of their own) ending up on long term furlough and actually taking advantage and actually *enjoying* it. Why wouldn't you?

According to some, they should all sit at home, in their front room, staring at the nearest wall.

(I do agree that people should however progressively be taken off furlough as normal life returns, as it is clearly not sustainable economically. I just count myself lucky I've had a job to go to throughout, and I'm not objecting to subsidising those who have fundamentally viable businesses, but are simply unable to trade normally due to restrictions)

 

[bramling]

Oh yes. Woe betide anybody (through no choice of their own) ending up on long term furlough and actually taking advantage and actually *enjoying* it. Why wouldn't you?

According to some, they should all sit at home, in their front room, staring at the nearest wall.

(I do agree that people should however progressively be taken off furlough as normal life returns, as it is clearly not sustainable economically. I just count myself lucky I've had a job to go to throughout, and I'm not objecting to subsidising those who have fundamentally viable businesses, but are simply unable to trade normally due to restrictions)

How would you feel about someone:

Being on furlough from March 2020 to July 2020 when their (hospitality) job was closed. Sick from July 2020 to October 2020 (and as I understand still on furlough during that time in consequence of the sickness). Back on furlough from October 2020 to May 2021 whilst the business was again closed. Then back on sick, with the declared intention of stringing this out until September 2021, whence they plan to pack up the job and possibly emigrate to Tortola.

This is probably an extreme case, but it does demonstrate how the scheme is open to severe abuse, when the objective of it was supposed to be a bridge through lockdown so that the job was still there the other side.

Meanwhile public sector staff who haven’t missed a day of work are potentially being told their pay is to be frozen, in order to subsidise this sort of thing.

 

[LAX54]

Who are those now that 'cannot' go to work ? Nightclubs are one of course, and some music artistes that need an almost full theatre to actually be able to pay the overheads, but surely now many who are furloughed who are quite happy being paid 80% and staying at home of course! But with the Country getting back to normal, those on furlough should now be getting very small in numbers ?
There is a guy at work whose neighbour is furloughed.... they are more than happy, still getting a fair wage, but not having to get up early or have any commute costs!
(and whilst we are here....stop this working from home malarky, customer service is currently at rock bottom!)

 

[wireforever]

MP'S each given £10,000 to work from home during the pandemic and still be able to claim expenses for everything they can claim for.No doubt they will be getting another big pay rise soon and it won't be 1% like the NHS got.Pity the media ignore all this report it for 1 day and move on.All the endless commons select committees recently ex BBC bosses denying all knowledge of a Bashir coverup 'our internal investigation was robust'
Leadsom is a dinosaur and out of touch and the tories wonder why they lost this weeks by election

 

[Ianno87]

How would you feel about someone:

Being on furlough from March 2020 to July 2020 when their (hospitality) job was closed. Sick from July 2020 to October 2020 (and as I understand still on furlough during that time in consequence of the sickness). Back on furlough from October 2020 to May 2021 whilst the business was again closed. Then back on sick, with the declared intention of stringing this out until September 2021, whence they plan to pack up the job and possibly emigrate to Tortola.

This is probably an extreme case, but it does demonstrate how the scheme is open to severe abuse, when the objective of it was supposed to be a bridge through lockdown so that the job was still there the other side.

Meanwhile public sector staff who haven’t missed a day of work are potentially being told their pay is to be frozen, in order to subsidise this sort of thing.

Such cases are an extreme minority.

The majority of people being responsible, and returning to work once their jobs become viable again, I have no beef with.

 

[Ian Cunningham]

MP'S each given £10,000 to work from home during the pandemic and still be able to claim expenses for everything they can claim for.No doubt they will be getting another big pay rise soon and it won't be 1% like the NHS got.Pity the media ignore all this report it for 1 day and move on.All the endless commons select committees recently ex BBC bosses denying all knowledge of a Bashir coverup 'our internal investigation was robust'
Leadsom is a dinosaur and out of touch and the tories wonder why they lost this weeks by election

If I recall correctly they weren't just handed £10000 but were granted additional expense allowance of up to £10000 to cover any costs of setting up their own WFH and from moving their constituency office to a WFH model

 

[The Ham]

I was furloughed last year (March to September, with some Flexi Furlough from mid August).

This was needed as at the time the company I worked for had little work, however since returning the workload had been fairly high and to the point that we've taken on extra staff and we've still got a lot to do.

Now from my experience the company I work for is a good example of how Furlough should work (and I don't doubt that some companies took advantage of it) there will need to be a time when it gets ended. However when that is will be a difficult decision to be made.

Cut it too early and people will be laid off who don't need to be, cut it too late and you'll keep people out of work (when there's other jobs which they could do).

I suspect that there may need to be an audit of those companies who still have furloughed staff at some point and a decision made about the future.

 

[island]

MP'S each given £10,000 to work from home during the pandemic and still be able to claim expenses for everything they can claim for.No doubt they will be getting another big pay rise soon and it won't be 1% like the NHS got.Pity the media ignore all this report it for 1 day and move on.All the endless commons select committees recently ex BBC bosses denying all knowledge of a Bashir coverup 'our internal investigation was robust'
Leadsom is a dinosaur and out of touch and the tories wonder why they lost this weeks by election

MPs’ salaries, which are in any event far too low for the hours and responsibilities of their roles, are a rounding error in the context of the cost of the furlough scheme.

 

[DelayRepay]

I have just read that council tenants in this area are very unhappy as there is a backlog of repairs. Since March 2020, only emergancies have been attended to.

The reason?The contractor furlough most of the staff (reasonably, is in March 2020 you were only able to enter someone's home to deal with an emergency), but they don't seem to have ever unfurloughed them!

 

[Ianno87]

I have just read that council tenants in this area are very unhappy as there is a backlog of repairs. Since March 2020, only emergancies have been attended to.

The reason?The contractor furlough most of the staff (reasonably, is in March 2020 you were only able to enter someone's home to deal with an emergency), but they don't seem to have ever unfurloughed them!

Presumably, the ulterior motive is to plug a hole in the council's budget. It's this sort of nonsense that needs to stop.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Who are those now that 'cannot' go to work ? Nightclubs are one of course, and some music artistes that need an almost full theatre to actually be able to pay the overheads, but surely now many who are furloughed who are quite happy being paid 80% and staying at home of course! But with the Country getting back to normal, those on furlough should now be getting very small in numbers ?
There is a guy at work whose neighbour is furloughed.... they are more than happy, still getting a fair wage, but not having to get up early or have any commute costs!
(and whilst we are here....stop this working from home malarky, customer service is currently at rock bottom!)

Lots in the travel industry won't be able to go back without being bored as travel is still very thin on the ground for now.

 

[Bantamzen]

Who are those now that 'cannot' go to work ? Nightclubs are one of course, and some music artistes that need an almost full theatre to actually be able to pay the overheads, but surely now many who are furloughed who are quite happy being paid 80% and staying at home of course! But with the Country getting back to normal, those on furlough should now be getting very small in numbers ?
There is a guy at work whose neighbour is furloughed.... they are more than happy, still getting a fair wage, but not having to get up early or have any commute costs!
(and whilst we are here....stop this working from home malarky, customer service is currently at rock bottom!)

People in the travel industry, people in the hospitality sector who are not yet required, people working for businesses that are part of the supply chain for starters.

 

[Mojo]

She is stating what most have been saying here for the last 15 months that Furlough had its place when lockdowns were in force but should only apply now to business that are prevented from trading everyone else should be back in there place of work. The media is full of stories of shortages of staff with broadsheets tonight focussing on HGV driver issues as the latest area starting to cause issues.

I think this is what the Job Support Scheme [Closed] was supposed to achieve, which was originally supposed to come in last Autumn when furlough was due to finish; of course with the extension of furlough this never actually came in.

Whilst in a fashion I agree with the principle, I think it would be difficult to implement due to the large number of sectors reliant on other sectors. Think for example airports; hotels, restaurants, taxi firms etc are all legally allowed to be open but probably not commercially viable with so few people travelling. Even manufacturing businesses, I remember at the time when this service was meant to come in there was a company that makes stuff for exhibitions saying they weren’t eligible, as their business was legally allowed to be open, but their customers were closed so they had no viable business.

 

[TPO]

Who are those now that 'cannot' go to work ? Nightclubs are one of course, and some music artistes that need an almost full theatre to actually be able to pay the overheads, but surely now many who are furloughed who are quite happy being paid 80% and staying at home of course! But with the Country getting back to normal, those on furlough should now be getting very small in numbers ?
There is a guy at work whose neighbour is furloughed.... they are more than happy, still getting a fair wage, but not having to get up early or have any commute costs!
(and whilst we are here....stop this working from home malarky, customer service is currently at rock bottom!)

Indeed.

Ironically, many of the nightclub staff and artists who have been effected couldn't be furloughed anyway as they were self-employed.

Much as I dislike Andrea Leadsome, I'm afraid she's correct on this. The basic tactic of the furloughed employee not wanting to come back to work is to be un-contactable. I know of some real cases where that is happening. No, you can't really blame the employee on one level, however if you dislike the thought of going back to a job that much then maybe you need to reappraise your life choices? Because it's ultimately highly antisocial to cheat the system like this.

The other interesting trend is a shortage of hospitality staff- they find they can earn more delivering parcels, and it's not such hard work........ which says a lot about the sector.

Shortages of some skills like HGV drivers are a result of (a) UK employers not investing in training, (b) poor working conditions- because until Brexit an Eastern European driver would work for less pay and perhaps was also less able to push back against an employer who encouraged long hours and all that goes with that. Pay a fair wage, treat people reasonably and train people- and there will be no shortage of HGV drivers. This at least would be a step towards leveling the playing field between road freight and rail freight.

TPO

 

[Butts]

Never mind those furloughed "loafers" - what about some reward for those of us who have to work the whole time ?

 

[Ianno87]

Never mind those furloughed "loafers" - what about some reward for those of us who have to work the whole time ?

As hard work as it has been at times, I'm just grateful to still have a job.

 

[wireforever]

I would hope the previous post does not mean including MP's in any reward for working throughout the pandemic.We will know soon enough when 'freedom day' is if the PM and his 2 mates professor doom and Dr death do the Downing Street briefing it is usually bad news

 

[ainsworth74]

Being on furlough from March 2020 to July 2020 when their (hospitality) job was closed. Sick from July 2020 to October 2020 (and as I understand still on furlough during that time in consequence of the sickness). Back on furlough from October 2020 to May 2021 whilst the business was again closed. Then back on sick, with the declared intention of stringing this out until September 2021, whence they plan to pack up the job and possibly emigrate to Tortola.

Well it has recently come out that staff who are sick are still eligible to be on furlough so from a technical perspective there's nothing especially wrong with them having been on furlough. If the suggestion is that their sickness was faked then the issue lies with the GP system where they are, due to the pressures on the GP system, probably more likely to hand out sick notes simply to clear a patient quickly (though I'm sure plenty of GPs do things properly still!!). Plus it sounds like more of an issue with the employer not having a robust sickness and absence policy to account for employees who may be faking sickness and dealing with them under either disciplinary or capability grounds.

In any event I would be very surprised if your scenario wasn't something of a minority pursuit!

The basic tactic of the furloughed employee not wanting to come back to work is to be un-contactable. I know of some real cases where that is happening.

If a member of my staff was out of contact despite reasonable attempts by myself to get in touch (phone calls, some emails maybe even a visit at home) over the course of a working week. Then personally I'd be starting a disciplinary proceedings as they are supposed to still be able to return to work.

It feels like a lot of the criticism directed against those "loafing about on furlough" (again what else are they supposed to do anyway?) are either directed at tiny number of people or are probably more accurately issues with the employer. Plus it is still the employer who makes the decision who isn't and is not on furlough at the end of the day...

Shortages of some skills like HGV drivers are a result of (a) UK employers not investing in training, (b) poor working conditions- because until Brexit an Eastern European driver would work for less pay and perhaps was also less able to push back against an employer who encouraged long hours and all that goes with that. Pay a fair wage, treat people reasonably and train people- and there will be no shortage of HGV drivers.

Now here I do agree with you fully. I think a fair number of British companies are going to be in for a rude awakening when it comes to getting staff to do various jobs again now that the flow of people from Europe who might be willing to put up with rubbish conditions and rubbish pay and came pre-trained (or didn't need training as the job was menial) are no longer available in anything like the numbers they were. I think a similar issue is likely to be playing out int he hospitality sector at the moment where there are also reports of issues finding enough staff.

 

[Ianno87]

It feels like a lot of the criticism directed against those "loafing about on furlough" (again what else are they supposed to do anyway?)

This thread is somewhat schizophrenic on this issue. Furloughees are simultaneously accused of lounging about doing nothing and making productive use of it for leisure or other productive activities.

Schrödinger's Furlough, if you will.

 

[317 forever]

I was on furlough last year until the company were going to have to make a contribution in September. Then together with other colleagues at the time we were made redundant.

I actually think this was for the best, as I would otherwise have maintained misguided loyalty to the company, stayed on furlough and become lonelier and less practiced at some of the job skills. I did then start another job in October, and even that was after treating myself to a short holiday first.

 

[birchesgreen]

Never mind those furloughed "loafers" - what about some reward for those of us who have to work the whole time ?

Our reward is to have to pay for all this mess for many years to come

 

[bramling]

This thread is somewhat schizophrenic on this issue. Furloughees are simultaneously accused of lounging about doing nothing and making productive use of it for leisure or other productive activities.

Schrödinger's Furlough, if you will.

There’s certainly a debate to very much be had on whether it’s ethically reasonable for the taxpayer to be subsidising the salary of person A whose job is on hold (quite possibly on dubious ground in some cases), whilst person B could be made redundant and be entitled to the normal range of benefits only.

Personally I think the length of time furlough has been going on for is excessive by several orders of magnitude. In my view it should have ended some time around last autumn when there was the (albeit half-hearted) back to work push.

One can’t help but get the feel furlough was largely intended as a “keep people sweet” policy as a sweetener for restrictions, more so than anything else. I’m not sure that’s a good use of taypayer money.