Why isn't everyone being treated equally?

energystar7

Why don't the government  introduce a monthly payment of exactly the same amount for every working adult during the virus who's unable to work?

What happens to those who have lost their jobs or were about to sign contracts with new employers etc if they're not eligible for universal credit.
All in this together, shouldn't we all be treated the same???

Takmon

If they paid everyone the same amount it may be more than one person needs so they profit from it and less than someone else needs so they still can't pay essential bills, so the 80% of earning is more than generous to be paying people. 
If you were in the process of changing jobs then any sensible person would have some money saved up just in case it all goes wrong because they could be fired for any reason in the first two years anyway. I think a lot of people are going to learn a hard lesson about having some money put aside for situations just like these. For as long as i have seen having 3 months expenses as an emergency fund has been the standard advice on here and many other sites, if that advice was followed then very few people would be having issues now. 

7Phil

It's not what the government has decided to do at this stage. Their primary concern is everyone's health first and then trying to protect as many jobs as possible.
This is a huge crisis and many people are hurting very badly. Some more than others. Many people will need help. Some more than others.

p00hsticks

Equal is not the same as fair.

You need to treat people differently in order to treat them fairly.

energystar7

People might have been sensible and have savings and now be out of work so can't claim anything.
Others who still have jobs can claim 80% of earnings up to £2,500 a month.
Should everyone not be helped?

Linton

A lot of the money would be wasted if the same was given to everyone.  I as a pensioner with investments would of course like some extra  money to replenish my falling pension pot, but I do not think other people would see this as a priority for the government.

p00hsticks

energystar7 said:

People might have been sensible and have savings and now be out of work so can't claim anything.
Others who still have jobs can claim 80% of earnings up to £2,500 a month.
Should everyone not be helped?

The country simpy can't afford to give everyone exactly the same significant amount of help, regardless of whether or not they need it.

Do you understand how the Governemnt retention scheme works ?

It's not those who are still able to work that are getting the money. It's exactly those people who would otherwise have been laid off and lost their jobs that are being given this - assuming that their employer chooses to partake in the scheme - in order to remain employed by the company, even though there is currently no work for them.

energystar7

So if its to retain staff should not agency workers be entitled to it such as those on zero hour contracts, set hours etc? If not they will loose their jobs.

Someone with a job offer who was due to start is also then best put on furlough.

Jeremy535897

Don't see the point of this thread. I doubt the Government is reading it, and that's who you are addressing this question to.

p00hsticks

energystar7 said:

So if its to retain staff should not agency workers be entitled to it such as those on zero hour contracts, set hours etc? If not they will loose their jobs.

Someone with a job offer who was due to start is also then best put on furlough.

As far as I'm aware (but I'm no an expert) people on zero hours contracts are eligible for it if their employer applies - it's based on what their PAYE earnings were in February

Jeremy535897

That point about February earnings is still speculation.