Vocal Voices

Tomorrow something like one million people will be informed about whether they have a job to go to on Monday - some will, some will not.

I said at the time that furlough was a good thing, if a bit too generous at 80%. Something like 65-70% would have allowed it to run deeper and longer, but that's history.

The thing now is that everybody has known for months that it was coming to an end. Anybody who has been on the scheme long-term and definitely for the last six months must have known that their job was in jeopardy. They could, and probably should, have taken steps to re skill or retrain. There were plenty of free resources out there to do so, and they had the time. No guarantee of a job, obviously, but they would have a broader skill set to "sell" to prospective employers.

The other thing is that there are something like 1.3 million job vacancies. Many of them are in towns and cites, where most of us live, and in industries such a retail, warehousing and hospitality, where the training needed to perform effectively is minimal. People can get to those jobs. And, yes, I do understand that they are not what people "want" to do, but in extremis and in the short term....? Let's face it £335 per week (min wage) is better than £74 JSA: it's survivable. In-work benefits will probably still be needed but the costs to the individuals, families and the country will be lessened.

It has always been the case that it is easier to get a job from having a job than being unemployed as it shows willing. Things are no different today. There are signs that the UK economy is growing and that there will be more and better paid jobs in the near future so there should be opportunities for many of these people to move up again.

They were discussing this on the lunchtime news, as M and I were eating lunch. Apparently the over 50's are expected to be hit worst, with far less chance of getting another job, or even working again!

The ageist thing has been the case for years and no government has ever tried to effectively tackle it, it is not unique to the present situation.

If the bleating form some sectors for visas for "unskilled" labour to cover shortages of workers is denied, as it should be, then maybe things could be different this time. Not saying they will be, but who knows?

We already have about 1.5 million unemployed in a mix of all skill levels and in different sectors, they should be the priority in the jobs market.

There was anecdotal evidence in the BBC evening news report just now that some furloughed workers had indeed taken the opportunity to go out and find another permanent job whilst they were laid off.
Would the original company still have been paid furlough money in those cases, I wonder?

TheOstrich wrote:There was anecdotal evidence in the BBC evening news report just now that some furloughed workers had indeed taken the opportunity to go out and find another permanent job whilst they were laid off.
Would the original company still have been paid furlough money in those cases, I wonder?

I would think that they would, since the employee would still be paid furlough money for the retained job as well as being paid by the new employer (as long as they hadn’t resigned from their furloughed job that is).

TheOstrich wrote:There was anecdotal evidence in the BBC evening news report just now that some furloughed workers had indeed taken the opportunity to go out and find another permanent job whilst they were laid off.
Would the original company still have been paid furlough money in those cases, I wonder?

Permanent jobs: possibly not. However, there is quite a lot of "anecdotal" evidence of many of them taking on part-time or cash-in-hand jobs to see them through.