ExcludedUK - for those EXCLUDED from adequate government support

laugh876

You may have heard Martin talking about & supporting us:

ExcludedUK is a grassroots volunteer-run not-for-profit organisation working towards bringing about an end to the exclusions in the UK Government’s Covid-19 financial support measures across all employment statuses, circumstances, professions and industries. These exclusions have led to significant disparities within the support offered, resulting in unfairness, injustice, discrimination and severe hardship for those affected.

Join us in the fight for parity:

Facebook groups : ExcludedUK - official community for those excluded from government support 
Facebook page: ExcludedUK 
Twitter: ExcludedUK
Instagram: ExcludedUK official 
LinkedIN: ExcludedUK
Website: ExcludedUK.org

Come join us now...
Thank you.

amykirk1996

@laugh876 - thanks for this.  There was a very large discussion about this previously in the Coronavirus support section, but it was completely overwhelmed by those 'included' and unsympathetic to the cause of those excluded from support.

As such, they kept reporting anything related to ExcludedUK as spam.

They helpfully suggested that 3 million people should "get a fruit picking role" and/or "find a job in a supermarket".

You would have thought with Martin Lewis himself supporting the campaign, there would be some empathy towards the plight of those excluded, but it would appear not.  A very sad state of affairs indeed, but the fight goes on.

noitsnotme

I was going to reply with a facepalm emoji but wasn’t sure if it would translate correctly in the forum.  So watching with interest instead 🤷‍♂️

amykirk1996

Yes, noitnotme, bizarrely the general consensus was that Mr Sunak was correct in supporting 95%*, but excluding the remainder.

On the bright side, the whole campaign of ExcludedUK and Gaps in Support has become a lot more mainstream since the early days when Chancellor Sunak could do no wrong.  It's clear for all to see now that the exclusion of these circa 3 million people is wrong and that finally he will wake up on the day of the Budget and change his tune.  We're not holding our breath though as he's still diverting/deflecting attention away to those he has supported and ignoring those he hasn't.

* - Source for 95% figure - 

https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1243222973357711369

noitsnotme

It’s the same old tired arguments as before with questionable statistics.  The old thread was removed for a reason, perhaps this one will be too.

jon81uk

Not all those who it is claimed are "exclueded" actually wore.
Many made themselves company director and took payment via dividend rather than salary to avoid paying income tax. If their salary was correct then could have furloughed themselves.

es5595

It’s difficult because some of these groups I feel very sorry for, and deserving of support, such as the newly self employed, in maternity/parental/adoption leave, new starters, those whose self employment is less than 50%, and those denied furlough (especially seeking furlough on child care grounds!). 

However, by lumping them in with directors who’ve “tax minimised” by taking dividends and those with +£50k trading profits, it dilutes the cause and makes me less likely to support them overall. 

Greenqueen_2

I was working in a part time, zero hours position without a contract. The business has folded and therefore I am now unemployed. Despite doing the job for almost 10 years, without a contract, I was not entitled to any redundancy money. I am also not entitled to any state benefits since I have made savings over the years and now have over the limit for claims. This means my income has been precisely nil for almost a year and I am living very frugally off my savings.   

I feel that had I spent my savings money on holidays, a nice car etc then I would now have been able to claim some Government assistance.  Prudence does not always pay!

Grumpy_chap

amykirk1996 said:

Mr Sunak was supporting 95%*, but excluding the remainder.
circa 3 million people 
* - Source for 95% figure - 

https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1243222973357711369

These statistics seem to be conflating different things.

The Twitter statement that is the source for the 95% appears to only be referring to sole-traders (taken from the link given by Amy):
"95% of people who are majority self-employed will benefit from this scheme." 

There are only 5 million self-employed:
"By the fourth quarter (Oct to Dec) of 2019, there were more than 5 million self-employed"
(Source:  https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/coronavirusandselfemploymentintheuk/2020-04-24#:~:text=By the fourth quarter (Oct,up from 12% in 2000.)
Even that data-set definition, "Self-employed people are those who define themselves as working for themselves", is not consistent with the definition uses in Rishi's Twitter feed.  Rishi was specifically referring "to support those who work for themselves, today I am announcing a new Self-Employed Income Support Scheme"  whereas those who define themselves as working for themselves may also include some that are Ltd Co. Directors and therefore outwith SEISS (but within CJRS if appropriate).

Anyway, I will take generous interpretations of the data:

• There were more than 5 million self-employed
• I will use 6 million as that meets the "more than" criteria but, presumably, if there were more than 6 million, the ONS would have said that
• 95% supported.
• 5.7 million
• Remainder not supported 0.3 million

Yet, in the claim that the Excluded are 3 million people and linking that to 95%, the reference for 95% would need to refer to the population as a whole:

• Population of the UK 66.8 million
• (Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates)
• 95% of 66.8 million = 63.5 million
• Remaining 5%  = 3.3 million which seems to match the Excluded claim of circa 3m left out 

It is clearly not correct to link the 95% reference to the number of self employed (sole-traders) supported with the population a a whole to arrive at 3 million Excluded.

Statistics is not a strong point for the Excluded campaign.  Indeed, it is the whole undoing of their campaign as it detracts from focusing for additional support to those that genuinely need it.

Grumpy_chap

Greenqueen_2 said:

doing the job for almost 10 years, without a contract, I was not entitled to any redundancy money.
 I am also not entitled to any state benefits since I have made savings over the years and now have over the limit for claims. This means my income has been precisely nil for almost a year

Have you applied for nJSA?  There is an entitlement assuming that you have sufficient NI contributions.

Irrespective of not having a written contract, there was one.  I think there is a statutory redundancy scheme for a company closing.  Have you posted on the employment boards?

Sadly, I don't think you fall into the group of interest to Excluded, even if you receive nothing.

jon81uk

Greenqueen_2 said:

I was working in a part time, zero hours position without a contract. The business has folded and therefore I am now unemployed. Despite doing the job for almost 10 years, without a contract, I was not entitled to any redundancy money. I am also not entitled to any state benefits since I have made savings over the years and now have over the limit for claims. This means my income has been precisely nil for almost a year and I am living very frugally off my savings.   

I feel that had I spent my savings money on holidays, a nice car etc then I would now have been able to claim some Government assistance.  Prudence does not always pay!

You need to get some advice, speak to CAB or similar as I'm pretty sure you had continuity of employment and therefore should have got at least statutory redundancy pay?
Contracts of employment - Citizens Advice
Continuous employment - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Redundancy: your rights: Redundancy pay - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
What are your rights with no contract of employment? | Springhouse Employment Solicitors (springhouselaw.com)