Furlough

[J R Hartley]

How is it protecting the economy extending by another month?

Companies are still going to make people redundant and all the while the government are footing the payroll then the vast majority of greedy bastard bosses are going to take advantage.

The economy is never going to get going again whilst we keep extending furlough.

[chris lee]

whats the alternative ?

[J R Hartley]

whats the alternative ?

Stop pandering to business that are only looking out for shareholders.

[adz-a32]

Because there is a need for people to have enough money for both economic and social reasons. Say you make someone redundant, statutory pay would be 1.5 weeks' pay for each year they worked at their employer. Imagine they have stuff like rent, bills, food etc to pay, they would struggle financially, which could lead to stress for example.

Also, the furloughing acts in the same way as an automatic stabiliser - enables people to spend (in theory) to keep aggregate demand closer to the levels pre-virus. In addition, it would enable people to go back to work as soon as COVID is over and ensures that people have jobs post-pandemic. Basically, it would help consumer confidence in the economy, reducing further damage to the economy.

[insider]

Furlough the Queen or sell one of her sparkling hats

[J R Hartley]

Because there is a need for people to have enough money for both economic and social reasons. Say you make someone redundant, statutory pay would be 1.5 weeks' pay for each year they worked at their employer. Imagine they have stuff like rent, bills, food etc to pay, they would struggle financially, which could lead to stress for example.

Also, the furloughing acts in the same way as an automatic stabiliser - enables people to spend (in theory) to keep aggregate demand closer to the levels pre-virus. In addition, it would enable people to go back to work as soon as COVID is over and ensures that people have jobs post-pandemic. Basically, it would help consumer confidence in the economy, reducing further damage to the economy.

You’ve never had a job fella what the **** do you know?

Get in the real world. Employers are going to make people redundant wether that be end of May, June, July or August.

The longer we furlough it just delays the inevitable and the more the taxpayer will be liable for.

As for spending. Who the **** is spending at the moment???

[adz-a32]

You’ve never had a job fella what the **** do you know?

Get in the real world. Employers are going to make people redundant wether that be end of May, June, July or August.

The longer we furlough it just delays the inevitable and the more the taxpayer will be liable for.

As for spending. Who the **** is spending at the moment???

No need to be personal. You don't know about my life.

People are spending for stuff like rent, bills and groceries as I mentioned. The government's argument for furloughing is job retention and I am sure they have economists who studied the labour market and made the decision based on that

[J R Hartley]

No need to be personal. You don't know about my life.

People are spending for stuff like rent, bills and groceries as I mentioned. The government's argument for furloughing is job retention and I am sure they have economists who studied the labour market and made the decision based on that

Job retention :hehe:

[adz-a32]

Job retention :hehe:

I'll let the government website do the talking. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-extends-furlough-scheme-to-end-of-june

I can see that me talking to you is never going to be progressive and that link is straight from the horse's mouth

[J R Hartley]

I'll let the government website do the talking. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-extends-furlough-scheme-to-end-of-june

I can see that me talking to you is never going to be progressive and that link is straight from the horse's mouth

Oh Adz

If you really think companies are not going to make people redundant in August/September that they would have made redundant in May before the furlough then that economics degree is wasted.

[adz-a32]

Oh Adz

If you really think companies are not going to make people redundant in August/September that they would have made redundant in May before the furlough then that economics degree is wasted.

You can quit with the patronising tone... I did not say that I thought that people wouldn't be redundant. I said that the job retention argument was the government's one. I don't have the data or calculations that the government has when they made the decision, hence why I directed you to the link.

[William Treseder]

How is it protecting the economy extending by another month?

Companies are still going to make people redundant and all the while the government are footing the payroll then the vast majority of greedy bastard bosses are going to take advantage.

The economy is never going to get going again whilst we keep extending furlough.
So you'd rather see workers get hee haw for 6 weeks, and then still get dumped?

[superfeathers]

How is it protecting the economy extending by another month?

Companies are still going to make people redundant and all the while the government are footing the payroll then the vast majority of greedy bastard bosses are going to take advantage.

The economy is never going to get going again whilst we keep extending furlough.

What is your alternative?
I guess we just leave things, companies go bust, people laid off with no realistic options of gaining employment
I’m sure the government is aware people will still get made redundant but by waiting for the market to gain traction again at least we will have a fighting chance of gaining new employment

[dembethewarrior]

Switched between self employment and PAYE don't qualify for it now as I was LTD when it happened.

Quite a few people have come out alright from it, madness how you can't put in figures for a LTD company mind.
Companies that are inactive can surely be found out? A lot of people have had to rely on universal credit.. trouble is if you earned last month and was honest about earnings you're probably going to end up above their threshold..and get **** all.

Meanwhile billionaires get their staff paid off by the govt... while slagging off football players to pass the buck.


**** off

[dembethewarrior]

I'll let the government website do the talking. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-extends-furlough-scheme-to-end-of-june

I can see that me talking to you is never going to be progressive and that link is straight from the horse's mouth

In all fairness paying wages isn't all some smaller businesses need. I know of a few who are struggling as what has been outlined to them isn't as it seems.

[Vindec]

Some would be the first to complain if we all went back to work too early causing another more serious wave of the virus. In fairness paying 80% of wages for the majority is a step I wold never have seen this government taking but of course that will have to be paid for when this is all over either through austerity or much higher taxation or a combination of the two.

[Jordi Culé]

Job retention :hehe:

Furloughing was more about safeguarding billionaires profits and a direct response to the likes of Branson screaming for government aid.

They could’ve gone for a Universal Basic Income for all which would’ve been a lot more equitable and would have provided a bigger safety net.

Not surprisingly, political pressures outweighed common sense.

[J R Hartley]

So you'd rather see workers get hee haw for 6 weeks, and then still get dumped?

Where do I say I’d rather them get nothing for 6 weeks? They will get their 80%. A lot of works shy bastards getting 80% too I may add.

[J R Hartley]

Furloughing was more about safeguarding billionaires profits and a direct response to the likes of Branson screaming for government aid.

They could’ve gone for a Universal Basic Income for all which would’ve been a lot more equitable and would have provided a bigger safety net.

Not surprisingly, political pressures outweighed common sense.
Of course it is. My boss has taken advantage of it and being the greedy bastard he is furloughed as many as possible with little regard of those of us that remain in work whilst he’s locked away safely.

I’m working 125% hours for 100% pay whilst the dead wood are getting 80% for doing feck all.

[delmbox]

You can quit with the patronising tone... I did not say that I thought that people wouldn't be redundant. I said that the job retention argument was the government's one. I don't have the data or calculations that the government has when they made the decision, hence why I directed you to the link.

I don't think you need an economics degree to work out that if you're going to get made redundant it's better to get made redundant when half expecting it in August/September having had an additional 4 months of pay, rather than dumped unceremoniously without warning in March

[CCFCC3PO]

I don't think you need an economics degree to work out that if you're going to get made redundant it's better to get made redundant when half expecting it in August/September having had an additional 4 months of pay, rather than dumped unceremoniously without warning in March

Not necessarily. The company may not be in a position to pay redundancy in September. If that happens, you'll just get statutory which is crap.

[CCFCC3PO]

Furloughing was more about safeguarding billionaires profits and a direct response to the likes of Branson screaming for government aid.

They could’ve gone for a Universal Basic Income for all which would’ve been a lot more equitable and would have provided a bigger safety net.

Not surprisingly, political pressures outweighed common sense.

Lots of people getting furloughed by people who can afford their wages. The system is not a good one.

[delmbox]

Not necessarily. The company may not be in a position to pay redundancy in September. If that happens, you'll just get statutory which is crap.

I meant from the point of view that you get an extra 4 months wages in your bank account before being let go

[Jordi Culé]

Lots of people getting furloughed by people who can afford their wages. The system is not a good one.

The whole strategy is more style than substance.

The usual culprits were screaming for state intervention and aid knowing they’ll continue to practice tax avoidance in the future. I’d have gone for a universal basic income for all. It’s not ideal in some ways but would’ve been a lot fairer than the system they’ve implemented. Unprecedented times do call for unprecedented and bold measures, leaving political beliefs on hold, sadly the UK government couldn’t do this.

It’s also ironic that the state can now pay for someone upto £2500 per month for doing nothing, whilst expect a nurse to risk themselves on a wage that doesn’t come near that.

[CCFCC3PO]

The whole strategy is more style than substance.

The usual culprits were screaming for state intervention and aid knowing they’ll continue to practice tax avoidance in the future. I’d have gone for a universal basic income for all. It’s not ideal in some ways but would’ve been a lot fairer than the system they’ve implemented. Unprecedented times do call for unprecedented and bold measures, leaving political beliefs on hold, sadly the UK government couldn’t do this.

It’s also ironic that the state can now pay for someone upto £2500 per month for doing nothing, whilst expect a nurse to risk themselves on a wage that doesn’t come near that.

:thumbup:

[CCFCC3PO]

I meant from the point of view that you get an extra 4 months wages in your bank account before being let go

I think that benefits people who have worked there the shorter amount of time. When you get to the longer serving staff, it becomes a bit counter productive. I'd rather get redundancy from a solvent company than one that has gone bust.

[adz-a32]

I don't think you need an economics degree to work out that if you're going to get made redundant it's better to get made redundant when half expecting it in August/September having had an additional 4 months of pay, rather than dumped unceremoniously without warning in March

Especially when the labour market will be worse than it already is

[adz-a32]

I think that benefits people who have worked there the shorter amount of time. When you get to the longer serving staff, it becomes a bit counter productive. I'd rather get redundancy from a solvent company than one that has gone bust.

The average person changes employer every 5 years.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38828581

So I guess that is the logic of the furlough scheme

[J R Hartley]

I meant from the point of view that you get an extra 4 months wages in your bank account before being let go

You already get 3 months wages for March, April and May.

Furlough was required in the short term but as lockdown restrictions will get relaxed in May then the economy can get going again.

The longer furlough goes on the more difficult it will be for the wheels of industry and the economy to get going.

The extension is counter productive.

[splott parker]

The first time I heard the word ‘furlough’ was in Sgt Bilko:hehe: