Martin Lewis joins campaigners calling on Treasury to help 3m excluded from coronavirus support

unholyangel

justwhat said:

sharpe106 said:

The latest payment £1,000 payment to business for bringing people back of furlough is the prime example, popular but what does it actually achieve?

Its to save jobs and slow redundancies down.  If we have too many redundancies rapidly the economy will go into melt down lol 

And how many jobs do you think it's actually going to save given the minimum outlay for an employer (on what we know so far - actual rules could increase this figure) would be around £1800 (plus the potential to entitle them to redundancy pay/more redundancy pay when they are laid off) with a return of £1000? And thats if they earn the absolute minimum allowed under the scheme. 

For someone full time on minimum wage, the minimum outlay is more like £5500-6000 for a return of £1000. 

Becles

I still think it's wrong that nothing was put in place so clinically vulnerable shielding workers could claim 80% of their wages if their employer refused to furlough them.

It's cruel of the Government to send out a letter telling them to stay in their home for months on end and leave them to either deal with the financial difficulties of their household income being cut drastically as they lose their wages and go onto benefits or they have to ignore the letter and continue to work risking their health.

Shielding workers with the letter should have had mandatory furlough if they couldn't work from home.

sharpe106

justwhat said:

sharpe106 said:

The latest payment £1,000 payment to business for bringing people back of furlough is the prime example, popular but what does it actually achieve?

Its to save jobs and slow redundancies down.  If we have too many redundancies rapidly the economy will go into melt down lol 

 It will cost a company more then that to keep the employee on, so either they can afford them or they can't. Even if they do keep them on nothing to stop them getting rid of them the next day. So for the handful of jobs it may save it will cost millions in payments to companies that have brought people back and no longer need it. 

 

Jonesy1977

barker_maria said:

This forum is to support and help people @dunstonh and the other comedians on this thread if you have nothing supportive or helpful to stay then perhaps visit another thread. It is a valid and important issue. If it wasn't Martin wouldn't have got behind the #ExcludedUK campaign and joined the ExcludedUK All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) which is also represented by over 200 cross party MPs.

The "Comedians" are making the point that there are not 3 million people who have been excluded or disadvantaged, this number is the reason why it elicits a mocking response.  This number has been proven, time after time on these threads to be factually incorrect.  A very small minority (for example those shielding who were not furloughed or those who left jobs in Jan or Feb whose previous employers would not re-employ for furlough) have a legitimate point and I am sure all would support a campaign to remedy this, but 3 million people is simply not true.  I am sure many on this thread would be happy to factually explain why...............however I think that Horse has also been well and truly flogged to death. 

gary83

it’s a shame the excludeduk group is still letting so many people down, so many people were deserving of help but they have been let down by being bundled in with the fictional 3 million that excludeduk still claim to speak for (yet still only have 11.7k followers on twitter, which seems to be their main protest weapon)

I don’t know how the chancellor could have been any clearer, every time he’s been asked about those excluded he’s trotted out the same answers. He says he’s moving forwards not backwards, the schemes won’t be changing and “unfortunately he couldn’t give everyone the help they wanted” yet despite that excludeduk hasn’t changed tack at all, they’ve Successfully attracted media attention, MP support and Constantly comment on Twitter but it’s obviously not working. the solution to the problem is pretty clearly not a hashtag, but they don’t seem to have a plan B, if they have spent nearly 4 months asking the same questions and receiving the same answers then why do they expect a different answer to the same questions now?

Becles

Jonesy1977 said:

barker_maria said:

This forum is to support and help people @dunstonh and the other comedians on this thread if you have nothing supportive or helpful to stay then perhaps visit another thread. It is a valid and important issue. If it wasn't Martin wouldn't have got behind the #ExcludedUK campaign and joined the ExcludedUK All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) which is also represented by over 200 cross party MPs.

The "Comedians" are making the point that there are not 3 million people who have been excluded or disadvantaged, this number is the reason why it elicits a mocking response.  This number has been proven, time after time on these threads to be factually incorrect.  A very small minority (for example those shielding who were not furloughed or those who left jobs in Jan or Feb whose previous employers would not re-employ for furlough) have a legitimate point and I am sure all would support a campaign to remedy this, but 3 million people is simply not true.  I am sure many on this thread would be happy to factually explain why...............however I think that Horse has also been well and truly flogged to death. 

The Excluded group hardly ever mentions shielding people who didn't get furloughed. 

gary83

Becles said:

Jonesy1977 said:

barker_maria said:

This forum is to support and help people @dunstonh and the other comedians on this thread if you have nothing supportive or helpful to stay then perhaps visit another thread. It is a valid and important issue. If it wasn't Martin wouldn't have got behind the #ExcludedUK campaign and joined the ExcludedUK All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) which is also represented by over 200 cross party MPs.

The "Comedians" are making the point that there are not 3 million people who have been excluded or disadvantaged, this number is the reason why it elicits a mocking response.  This number has been proven, time after time on these threads to be factually incorrect.  A very small minority (for example those shielding who were not furloughed or those who left jobs in Jan or Feb whose previous employers would not re-employ for furlough) have a legitimate point and I am sure all would support a campaign to remedy this, but 3 million people is simply not true.  I am sure many on this thread would be happy to factually explain why...............however I think that Horse has also been well and truly flogged to death. 

The Excluded group hardly ever mentions shielding people who didn't get furloughed. 

That’s a very good point, you’d think they’d be a group that deserve support & who’s stories could pull on the heart strings in press releases and could be used to good effect for their PR but they keep getting overlooked 

sharpe106

They were entitled to SSP, so they had been covered and not excluded. Granted not as generously as other groups. 

gary83

sharpe106 said:

They were entitled to SSP, so they had been covered and not excluded. Granted not as generously as other groups. 

Excluded aren’t that picky though. if you are entitled to something like SSP or a bounce back loan they’ll still count you as excluded and say you received no help.

sharpe106

I suppose they can all look forward to a half price meal next month to make up for it all.