New Job Support Scheme announced to replace Furlough scheme from 1 November

[brad465]

Just coming in, with plans to cover wages for up to 2/3 of working hours for next 6 months:

Rishi Sunak unveils emergency jobs scheme

The Job Support Scheme will see the government top up the pay of people who can only work part-time in "viable jobs".

www.bbc.co.uk

Government to top up wages of workers covering up to two-thirds of their hours for next six months, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announces.

This image also from the live feed:

 

[birchesgreen]

I wish they'd top up my wages, been on 2/3 hours (and thus pay) for months. Kind of annoying that i would have got more if i had been furloughed.

 

[DB]

So there will be a cost to employers in doing this. Suspect that many won't be able to afford that and will reduce staffing levels instead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So there will be a cost to employers in doing this. Suspect that many won't be able to afford that and will reduce staffing levels instead.

I suspect that may be what the Government wants. Many jobs won't be able to be saved, but they don't want them all coming to an end at once.

 

[Darandio]

So there will be a cost to employers in doing this. Suspect that many won't be able to afford that and will reduce staffing levels instead.

It might concentrate a few minds. Those sitting at home on furlough that were desperate for it to continue along with harsher lockdown measures might change their tune a bit.

 

[brad465]

According to the updated article above (from the ONS), 3 million people, or 12% of the total workforce, are still on furlough at least partially.

 

[bramling]

So there will be a cost to employers in doing this. Suspect that many won't be able to afford that and will reduce staffing levels instead.

Presumably the main benefit to employers would be if they particularly want to keep a good person or team of people that they have developed. Otherwise I can’t really see what the incentive would be.

 

[DB]

Presumably the main benefit to employers would be if they particularly want to keep a good person or team of people that they have developed. Otherwise I can’t really see what the incentive would be.

Yes - probably only going to apply in higher-sklled roles though, so lower-waged jobs are likely to be at particular risk.

 

[thejuggler]

It might concentrate a few minds. Those sitting at home on furlough that were desperate for it to continue along with harsher lockdown measures might change their tune a bit.

I suspect those now on furlough are at the very sharp end and employed by companies which simply cannot operate. Any sort of entertainment industry is still largely closed.

The impact just on the sports sector is massive, add in theatre, live music venues, clubs, visitor attractions, events and exhibitions and it affects hundreds of thousands employed in sectors everyone would miss if they disappeared.

 

[Class 33]

It doesn't really help the people that are unemployed(as in proper unemployed, not on furlough or temporarily layed off). Because whilst this social distancing nonsense still drags on for months and months on end, there are FAR fewer jobs being advertised, and it's near impossible to get a job!!!

 

[Huntergreed]

It doesn't really help the people that are unemployed(as in proper unemployed, not on furlough or temporarily layed off). Because whilst this social distancing nonsense still drags on for months and months on end, there are FAR fewer jobs being advertised, and it's near impossible to get a job!!!

Indeed, there's going to be a very big employment crisis indeed when this all calms down!

 

[bramling]

Indeed, there's going to be a very big employment crisis indeed when this all calms down!

Absolutely. And whilst there’s been some murmurings of realism from Sunak, we still have Boris going round with the “send this packing” nonsense.

Reality is this is costing us *all* money in various different ways. Some individuals and businesses are going to struggle to make the sums add up to enable them to come out the other end.

The trouble with furlough was that it insulated too many people from reality. A rushed measure that we never really understood what the purpose was - it seems to have started as a means of getting through the lockdown, but quickly became a way of transferring costs to the government. Meanwhile *some* people thought the idea of a rolling block of extra annual leave was an appealing one.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

What an absolute mess. I wish I had a solution.

 

[Yew]

What an absolute mess. I wish I had a solution.

I'd recommend a solution of water and ethanol.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd recommend a solution of water and ethanol.

But not after 10pm!

 

[jtuk]

What an absolute mess. I wish I had a solution.

There is a very obvious solution, just do the opposite of what Boris and Hancock are doing

 

[PaulMc7]

It doesn't really help the people that are unemployed(as in proper unemployed, not on furlough or temporarily layed off). Because whilst this social distancing nonsense still drags on for months and months on end, there are FAR fewer jobs being advertised, and it's near impossible to get a job!!!

I am currently unemployed and fully agree with this. I've been living on savings during this because I don't even qualify for Universal Credit either because I live with my girlfriend and she works full-time.

Before this pandemic I applied for roughly 35-40 jobs a day. I think in the last 2/3 months I've applied for more than 10 in a day 3/4 times max. Doesn't help that it's admin/office work that I have my year of experience in either with the current situation.

For context as well, I already had to be careful with what I apply for due to having to manage my Aspergers too

 

[DustyBin]

But not after 10pm!

Unless you're at home. With no more than five others. No parties. Then it's fine.

 

[martin2345uk]

I am currently unemployed and fully agree with this. I've been living on savings during this because I don't even qualify for Universal Credit either because I live with my girlfriend and she works full-time.

My friend lives with his parents who both work but he qualified for UC, so that seems a bit harsh of them!

 

[PaulMc7]

My friend lives with his parents who both work but he qualified for UC, so that seems a bit harsh of them!

Yeah I live with my girlfriend and sister and my sister is at uni and works part time at weekends so it's not like we have thousands a month coming in. We manage just about though

 

[bramling]

What an absolute mess. I wish I had a solution.

I must say I could scream at the moment (not helped by getting a rainy day on our holiday today, which wouldn’t have been an issue except that it wasn’t forecast quite as it turned out!).

The thing that’s really bugging me at the moment is the “strategy” seems to revolve around picking at whatever comes into their heads at the given moment. This is becoming more and more damaging on a number of different levels.

It’s so obvious they’ve been boxed into this announcement today, a case of being seen to do something. But it doesn’t address the root of the problem, and being drawn up in a rush is bound to mean it’s not fit for purpose. We are trying to drain the ocean, and shelling out billions (that we don’t have) in the process.

 

[talldave]

No surprise that the self-employed who operate through limited companies are still ignored. In my case the requirement to be "Ltd" comes from customers, so through no choice of my own I continue to be well and truly screwed.

 

[thejuggler]

I'd like to see some worked examples of how this works in practice as it looks like a Government Heads we win Tales you lose scenario.

Why would a business pay a FT employee on reduced hours more for doing the same hours as a PT employee?

What about employer NI and pension contributions for the hours not worked and subsidised?

I suspect over the next couple of days employers will be doing the sums and realising its not such a generous offer.

 

[DB]

I'd like to see some worked examples of how this works in practice as it looks like a Government Heads we win Tales you lose scenario.

Why would a business pay a FT employee on reduced hours more for doing the same hours as a PT employee?

What about employer NI and pension contributions for the hours not worked and subsidised?

I suspect over the next couple of days employers will be doing the sums and realising its not such a generous offer.

I get the impression it's intended to be seen to be doing something but designed to minimise actual take up.

That way, the government will be able to try to shift the blame onto employers when there are loads of redundancies.

 

[bramling]

I get the impression it's intended to be seen to be doing something but designed to minimise actual take up.

That way, the government will be able to try to shift the blame onto employers when there are loads of redundancies.

Perhaps Sunak is starting to panic at the amount of money splashing around.

It’s rather disturbing that there doesn’t seem to be any hint of how the costs for all this are going to be met in the medium and longer term.

 

[DustyBin]

I get the impression it's intended to be seen to be doing something but designed to minimise actual take up.

That way, the government will be able to try to shift the blame onto employers when there are loads of redundancies.

Call me cynical but I had the same thought. “We put support measures in place but employers chose not to take advantage of them”. I can hear it now....

Perhaps Sunak is starting to panic at the amount of money splashing around.

It’s rather disturbing that there doesn’t seem to be any hint of how the costs for all this are going to be met in the medium and longer term.

Truly terrifying isn’t it! You were right in what you said this morning, total ad hockery despite the government knowing furlough was coming to an end....

 

[brad465]

I get the impression it's intended to be seen to be doing something but designed to minimise actual take up.

That way, the government will be able to try to shift the blame onto employers when there are loads of redundancies.

I've seen this spoken about elsewhere, possibly also on this forum, but however much the Government try to shift the blame, a surge in unemployment will unfortunately lead to potentially millions finding out the harsh realities of Universal credit (4 million is the WCS I've seen predicted), which will include many who've voted for them before (none more so than those red wall seats they won).

 

[bramling]

Truly terrifying isn’t it! You were right in what you said this morning, total ad hockery despite the government knowing furlough was coming to an end....

I’m surprised this is something the media aren’t probing deeper into.

 

[Ian Cunningham]

No surprise that the self-employed who operate through limited companies are still ignored. In my case the requirement to be "Ltd" comes from customers, so through no choice of my own I continue to be well and truly screwed.

Sadly no surprise - there is a cruel irony that it was HMRC rules that pushed many sole traders / freelancers into Ltd status

It's not much better for Sole Traders - we're only getting 20% of taxable profit for November, December and January then (hopefully) some other amount for the following 3 months (not sure what happened to October as SEISS only runs to the end of September

 

[Bantamzen]

But not after 10pm!

My wine rack would disagree....

Seriously though, as others have said this is a real mess. There was never any doubt that the original furlough scheme was going to be ended, I knew this in a professional capacity quite some time ago although I am not at liberty to say why. And there were very strong rumours that Sunak was having kittens about the cost. So what we see now really isn't a surprise, the government quite simply doesn't have the money to pay people to stay at home.

The real worry, and this should concern us all is how the hell do we pay for what's already been done? I think w all know the answer to that, cutbacks & tax hikes.