Corona Virus Business Wage Relief

[mattyboy1973]

23 minutes ago, cbathpc said:

I fail to see why you wouldn't just close up shop. A member of my family runs a travel agent, his options are close up or furlough. Either way, its not like his staff are going to have any other options, landlord isn't getting rent from elsewhere. May as well just fold and start again once the dust settles; if it's worth it to do so. 

It probably is the logical thing to do in many of these cases, rather than taking on more debt which might prove impossible to pay off in the future economic climate. How many businesses will be able to make that logical decision early on, I don't know. In the case of our local nurseries, I suspect they'll struggle on since they will have spent most of their costs for this selling season. I know at least one of them is trying to set up a local delivery service, but although I'm sure they'll make some money that way, in my own experience plant sales are very "browsing" triggered and I doubt they will make more than a small fraction of their usual revenues. So they'll probably struggle on until they literally can't any more.

[Fromage Frais]

As I posted I would have mothballed and closed.

However with the promise of a loan and staff furlough made me feel like a little work from me could save nice people a lot of financial hardship.

Then the furlough was to be paid 2/3.months and claimed back.  

Then the loan was not an option as have some savings 

The loan looks like a total failure and about to be changed.

For example to lay everyone off would have cost me 20-30000 and done

To furlough is 20k x 2/3 plus admin, plus payroll plus gov balls it up and do not pay making it 3/4 months.

They have created costs for people

[Patfig]

Quote

?

 

17 minutes ago, Fromage Frais said:

As I posted I would have mothballed and closed.

However with the promise of a loan and staff furlough made me feel like a little work from me could save nice people a lot of financial hardship.

Then the furlough was to be paid 2/3.months and claimed back.  

Then the loan was not an option as have some savings 

The loan looks like a total failure and about to be changed.

For example to lay everyone off would have cost me 20-30000 and done

To furlough is 20k x 2/3 plus admin, plus payroll plus gov balls it up and do not pay making it 3/4 months.

They have created costs for people

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by Patfig
clumsy

[Patfig]

The loans look like a total pile of crap.

 

[adamLancs]

If you have lost any service due to disruption, call VISA and get your money back. Don't screw around trying to talk to closed companies. That's 3 now for me. 

A society of scroungers ... not common folk but the businesses.

Edited April 2, 2020 by adamLancs

[Fromage Frais]

1 hour ago, Patfig said:

The loans look like a total pile of crap.

 

more than 10 pages of application.... for then to be told if you have any assets its a no go.

TBH I only was interested as a matter of prudence and cover the wages costs lest they go over 3 months.

Hearing stories of 7-30% interest rates, personal guarantees and early payment charges etc etc.  Which if true sounds like opportunism with the base rates so low.

No wonder it's all going to be reviewed however a lot of businesses will now be passed the point of no return and incurred extra costs they could have avoided folding earlier.

I have total respect for a no bailouts policy and I understand having a bailouts policy......but saying one thing and leading people along is very poor form imho.

Edited April 2, 2020 by Fromage Frais

[Patfig]

16 minutes ago, Fromage Frais said:

more than 10 pages of application.... for then to be told if you have any assets its a no go.

TBH I only was interested as a matter of prudence and cover the wages costs lest they go over 3 months.

Hearing stories of 7-30% interest rates, personal guarantees and early payment charges etc etc.  Which if true sounds like opportunism with the base rates so low.

No wonder it's all going to be reviewed however a lot of businesses will now be passed the point of no return and incurred extra costs they could have avoided folding earlier.

I have total respect for a no bailouts policy and I understand having a bailouts policy......but saying one thing and leading people along is very poor form imho.

Its effing amateur

[Locke]

8 minutes ago, Patfig said:

Its effing amateur

A People gets the government they deserve.

Today, there is

1) no money left

2) an expectation of something for nothing

3) a preference for easy lies over a difficult truth

 

So you end up with lies promising bailouts for free while in reality everyone will get nothing.

[Patfig]

The need for a personal guarantee on the emergency loan scheme has been removed for loans of under 250K. It will be interesting to see what that does to the offer rate for these loans bearing in mind that the banks are borrowing at close to 0%.

[papag]

On 31/03/2020 at 15:08, Patfig said:

Colin W@nker

Colin's not by himself in the game you could name lots more.  most of them just keep getting work thrown at them for some reason and in time honored fashion cash will do nicely thank you. It can be passed through a open car window if its a chq probably made out to their dogs offshore account

[Andy T]

Surprising how many people in my extended family have been furloughed, some right from the day it was announced. Has anyone actually been paid yet on this basis? considering we've recently had a month end, and some jobs still pay weekly.

Has it being confirmed exactly what will be paid? i.e. a true 80% of net wages, or pulled down my employers N.I contributions etc?  expecting lots of reports of people not getting paid the amount they 'expected'.

[GregBowman]

10 minutes ago, Andy T said:

Surprising how many people in my extended family have been furloughed, some right from the day it was announced. Has anyone actually been paid yet on this basis? considering we've recently had a month end, and some jobs still pay weekly.

Has it being confirmed exactly what will be paid? i.e. a true 80% of net wages, or pulled down my employers N.I contributions etc?  expecting lots of reports of people not getting paid the amount they 'expected'.

It doesn't go to the employee direct. It is treated as revenue by the client who pays the employee as normal. Therefore it is 80% of gross wages as a subsidy. 

The maximum is £2500 a month per employee which  equates to a gross salary of £3125. Anything else on top is subject to local arrangement

The not expected bit will be from people who don't understand their payslip

[Andy T]

15 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

It doesn't go to the employee direct. It is treated as revenue by the client who pays the employee as normal. Therefore it is 80% of gross wages as a subsidy. 

The maximum is £2500 a month per employee which  equates to a gross salary of £3125. Anything else on top is subject to local arrangement

The not expected bit will be from people who don't understand their payslip

Yes aware that the employer claims it then pays employee.

Surprised that the £2500 maximum isn't the gross figure though , as it was described as 'employer wage costs'

[GregBowman]

3 minutes ago, Andy T said:

Yes aware that the employer claims it then pays employee.

Surprised that the £2500 maximum isn't the gross figure though , as it was described as 'employer wage costs'

It is the gross just 80% of it up to £3125.00

Full or part time employees on a salary

Claim for the 80% of the employee’s salary, as of 28 February 2020, before tax.

Edited April 7, 2020 by GregBowman

[regprentice]

7 minutes ago, Andy T said:

Yes aware that the employer claims it then pays employee.

Surprised that the £2500 maximum isn't the gross figure though , as it was described as 'employer wage costs'

The difference in the 3.1k and 2.5k figures is the 100% salary vs 80% furloughed pay. 

[GregBowman]

15 minutes ago, regprentice said:

The difference in the 3.1k and 2.5k figures is the 100% salary vs 80% furloughed pay. 

Yep thanks if I wasn't clear 

[Andy T]

ah thanks, must of been a while since last read about it on gov.uk

[GregBowman]

21 minutes ago, Andy T said:

ah thanks, must of been a while since last read about it on gov.uk

?

[Andy T]

Apparently the scheme is now open to those who are struggling to work from home because they are looking after their children, hence The mirror's headline 'Now you can be furloughed to look after your children'

You can see this being taken advantage of in a two parent household where one parent is already furloughed and the other is working from home - they can manage fine as they are but the other takes furlough as well so they can spend more time out at the park.

 

 

[Hullabaloo82]

40 minutes ago, Andy T said:

Apparently the scheme is now open to those who are struggling to work from home because they are looking after their children, hence The mirror's headline 'Now you can be furloughed to look after your children'

You can see this being taken advantage of in a two parent household where one parent is already furloughed and the other is working from home - they can manage fine as they are but the other takes furlough as well so they can spend more time out at the park.

 

 

Depends on your income and job role really. 

I'm kind of keen on this idea and my wife and kids are making working from home really hard for me anyway but "We are really alive to people's family needs" really translates as "we're seeing which ones of you will volunteer to stick your hands up for redundancy in 3 months time when the proverbial really hits the fan". 

Also doesn't feel like a sensible time to voluntarily reduce your income when we're being told to expect the financial apocalypse. Our travel, eating out etc costs are now nil but regardless the cap would mean the furlough would see me the best part of a grand down on take home plus my wife s couple of hundred quid. I'm expecting utilities to go up but it feels like a sensible time to be trying to add to savings or pay down that credit card right now. 

[Andy T]

1 hour ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Depends on your income and job role really. 

I'm kind of keen on this idea and my wife and kids are making working from home really hard for me anyway but "We are really alive to people's family needs" really translates as "we're seeing which ones of you will volunteer to stick your hands up for redundancy in 3 months time when the proverbial really hits the fan". 

Also doesn't feel like a sensible time to voluntarily reduce your income when we're being told to expect the financial apocalypse. Our travel, eating out etc costs are now nil but regardless the cap would mean the furlough would see me the best part of a grand down on take home plus my wife s couple of hundred quid. I'm expecting utilities to go up but it feels like a sensible time to be trying to add to savings or pay down that credit card right now. 

Yes, I think lots of workers that have demanded furlough or volunteered for it (there's some envy going on of others furloughed at home enjoying the weather) might have a shock later down the line when the job no longer exists.

I still work in the office (employer policy is that only the 'extremely vulnerable'  get to work from home) I would like to have some extra time at home but not going to risk my job for it unless forced to.

I also work in a sector where there is a long lag between order/production/delivery, so our downturn might hit in 3 months time or later when the furlough scheme has probably long gone, so expecting short time working without gov support and/or redundancies.

[GregBowman]

13 hours ago, Andy T said:

Apparently the scheme is now open to those who are struggling to work from home because they are looking after their children, hence The mirror's headline 'Now you can be furloughed to look after your children'

You can see this being taken advantage of in a two parent household where one parent is already furloughed and the other is working from home - they can manage fine as they are but the other takes furlough as well so they can spend more time out at the park.

 

 

Not sure how it can be open or not to your personal circumstances - it’s not like voluntary redundancy - it is 100% the employers choice who is furloughed seems a gov platitude to me 

You can’t ‘take’ furlough it is at the direction of the employer as I said further up the money goes to the employer first 

On an individual basis you could make informal approaches to your boss I guess sort of flexible working style  as normal 

As others have said - I wouldn’t be too quick to volunteer - I am working on two who do we furlough projects with my clients ( sorry to the anti contractor brigade but actually this has been ok for me - you don’t get any dead peasant insurance from the government for us so might as well keep us doing stuff albeit on reduced money/days than a permanent employee) the next spreadsheet down the line will be the redundancy one if demand doesn’t pick up and why make it easy to copy and paste from the furlough one ?

 

[regprentice]

British Chamber of Commerce reports today that the take up of furlough is expected to be 3 times higher than the govt predicted (they predicted 10% of the population would be furloughed) and the total cost is likely to be £40Bn for 3 months. 

37% of small and medium sized businesses are furloughing at least 75% of their staff

20% of small and medium. Sized businesses are furloughing all the staff. 

That equates to at least one third of the non-public sector workforce on furlough. There aren't any figures for larger employers but that number could be even higher. 

Edited April 8, 2020 by regprentice

[cbathpc]

22 minutes ago, regprentice said:

British Chamber of Commerce reports today that the take up of furlough is expected to be 3 times higher than the govt predicted (they predicted 10% of the population would be furloughed) and the total cost is likely to be £40Bn for 3 months. 

37% of small and medium sized businesses are furloughing at least 75% of their staff

20% of small and medium. Sized businesses are furloughing all the staff. 

That equates to at least one third of the non-public sector workforce on furlough. There aren't any figures for larger employers but that number could be even higher. 

I'm surprised it's not higher. If they expected many companies to do the 'honourable' thing, they've got another thing coming. 

They set the money way too high. Staff shouldn't want it, but right now some are seeing it as a lottery win

[Andy T]

54 minutes ago, regprentice said:

British Chamber of Commerce reports today that the take up of furlough is expected to be 3 times higher than the govt predicted (they predicted 10% of the population would be furloughed) and the total cost is likely to be £40Bn for 3 months. 

37% of small and medium sized businesses are furloughing at least 75% of their staff

20% of small and medium. Sized businesses are furloughing all the staff. 

That equates to at least one third of the non-public sector workforce on furlough. There aren't any figures for larger employers but that number could be even higher. 

They set the percentage too high and made it too easy. Zombie businesses taking it up, lazy owners who could of carried on trading but it's the easy option to furlough all staff and take the small business grants as well I'd imagine.

People in general moan about poor pay, but plenty seem to snap up 80% furlough even when it was unclear if 80% was net wages or 80% gross costs without much thought to whether they can afford the drop or not. They will also expect mortgage holidays, council tax holidays or discounts, interest free overdrafts, forbearance on debts/bills on top of this.  It doesn't send the message that you should be prudent with your own finances.

If it costs  £40 Billion - where is this coming from?  will it come out of the £200Bn QE?