Independent Leyton Orient Forum

RedO wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:16 pm

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:04 pm I dont understand the new scheme at all. They'll pay a small amount of somebodys wage, but only if they drastically reduce their hours?

The employer pays for whatever hours are worked but has to be at least 1/3 of normal.

Whatever isn't paid is shared 3 ways - the employer, the Govt and the employee.

If an employee works 50% hours, he'll be paid 83% of his usual money - 67% by the employer and 17% by Govt, suffering 17% loss himself (Apologies to Spen for rounding).

But whats the incentive for companies to pay 67% of the wage but get 50% of the work?

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:56 am So Mr Vallance has shares in the vaccine company GSK. Wake up sheep! [/Thor]

Didn’t someone mention this months ago? Also didn’t someone say he gets money from Gates company and or foundation?

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:23 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:16 pm

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:04 pm I dont understand the new scheme at all. They'll pay a small amount of somebodys wage, but only if they drastically reduce their hours?

The employer pays for whatever hours are worked but has to be at least 1/3 of normal.

Whatever isn't paid is shared 3 ways - the employer, the Govt and the employee.

If an employee works 50% hours, he'll be paid 83% of his usual money - 67% by the employer and 17% by Govt, suffering 17% loss himself (Apologies to Spen for rounding).

But whats the incentive for companies to pay 67% of the wage but get 50% of the work?

My interpretation is that this is what Sunak means when he says the scheme will help workers who are in "viable" jobs.

An employer will weigh up the cost of paying the additional amount against the cost of redundancy now and recruitment again later if business picks up. If a recovery is realistic then they may feel the job is viable. If not, then there is no incentive to pay the difference, so the employer may as well let the employee go.

It's clear now that they've accepted mass redundancies are a probability. I wonder if there is a longer-term expectation that, with fewer jobs around, a section of the workforce may see a transition to fewer hours/less pay becoming the norm? Is this what he may have meant by a "permanent economic adjustment"?

Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 5:09 pm

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:23 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:16 pm

The employer pays for whatever hours are worked but has to be at least 1/3 of normal.

Whatever isn't paid is shared 3 ways - the employer, the Govt and the employee.

If an employee works 50% hours, he'll be paid 83% of his usual money - 67% by the employer and 17% by Govt, suffering 17% loss himself (Apologies to Spen for rounding).

But whats the incentive for companies to pay 67% of the wage but get 50% of the work?

My interpretation is that this is what Sunak means when he says the scheme will help workers who are in "viable" jobs.

An employer will weigh up the cost of paying the additional amount against the cost of redundancy now and recruitment again later if business picks up. If a recovery is realistic then they may feel the job is viable. If not, then there is no incentive to pay the difference, so the employer may as well let the employee go.

It's clear now that they've accepted mass redundancies are a probability. I wonder if there is a longer-term expectation that, with fewer jobs around, a section of the workforce may see a transition to fewer hours/less pay becoming the norm? Is this what he may have meant by a "permanent economic adjustment"?

Think you may be right. I took it as a hint to some sort of ubi.

Dream on lefty.

I can't see it. I think it's too far from their ideology and they are always very strong on sticking to ideology itself. (Just nothing else).

I think really they have zero choice but to increase Universal Credit and make it an easier process plus remove the minimum floor though.

UBI, if it ever happens, is a long way off. And any government would be wise to let others be the early adopters and monitor their experiences to determine how real-world implementation differs from the theory.

But UC needs significant improvement.

Assuming the employer already has enough work for the employee to be on flexible furlough - working, say, 1/3rd of the contract, then it's not really more expensive for the employer on the new scheme than it will be in October on the current scheme. Basically, the employee loses and the govt pays less.

IF the employer still has the employee off on Furlough the whole time, then there's no real incentive to bring them back to work - (if the business doesn't need it).

Ah, so this is not really going to make much difference (or require much government spending)?

To my jaded eye, it smacks more of being able to say "we carried on providing support" - while the redundancy numbers shoot up.

If an employer has their people sat and home, and has been holding off redundancy during the furlough scheme - then it's been getting more expensive for them each month, and the Govt % tapers off (started at 80%, then down to 70%, to 60% in October, with the employer making up the difference as the grant % reduces.

I guess this is how he differentiates between "viable" and "non-viable" jobs - if there's already a need for some employment - then the employer can carry it on at much the same cost as the tapered furlough scheme (which is still more, per hour worked, than having people at work 100% of the time). If an employer has been hanging on, well I guess now's the time that they might decide to cut their losses.

Got it - thanks, that makes sense now.

Zlatan Ibrahimovic becomes the 2nd Milan player to test
Positive in 2 days

https://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2020/09 ... -covid-19/

So clear yesterday, not clear today and no symptoms. Is it possible one or other of the tests was wrong?

When my friend had it & was Hospitalised in
Full need of an oxygen mask , he was told the test was to late as he
He was in the full throes of it .

1 day you dont have enough of the virus to show up
The next day you do. Its how virus work thory .

Think school petri dishes .
You'd put a tiny amount of bacteria on the dish &
Put in the fridge.
1 week later you look at the petri dish & it is rife with the bacteria
which has multiplied thousands of times over.

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:59 pm When my friend had it & was Hospitalised in
Full need of an oxygen mask , he was told the test was to late as he
He was in the full throes of it .

1 day you dont have enough of the virus to show up
The next day you do. Its how virus work thory .

Think school petri dishes .
You'd put a tiny amount of bacteria on the dish &
Put in the fridge.
1 week later you look at the petri dish & it is rife with the bacteria
which has multiplied thousands of times over.

Eh?

Thor wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:54 pm So clear yesterday, not clear today and no symptoms. Is it possible one or other of the tests was wrong?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... zZOkzv6KZh

Disoriented wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:34 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:59 pm When my friend had it & was Hospitalised in
Full need of an oxygen mask , he was told the test was to late as he
He was in the full throes of it .

1 day you dont have enough of the virus to show up
The next day you do. Its how virus work thory .

Think school petri dishes .
You'd put a tiny amount of bacteria on the dish &
Put in the fridge.
1 week later you look at the petri dish & it is rife with the bacteria
which has multiplied thousands of times over.

Eh?

Mick McQuaidLevel One Boarder

Re: CoronavirusReportQuoteThanks

Post Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:38 am

Thor wrote: ↑So clear yesterday, not clear today and no symptoms. Is it possible one or other of the tests was wrong?


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... zZOkzv6KZh

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france ... n-24-hours

France sees record new coronavirus infections, with more than 16,000 cases in 24 hours

This is how some people react when asked to follow Covid 19 rules (in leafy Surrey too )
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 72668.html

So a Positive Private test doesnt count on
NHS track & trace ?

Thats a bit disturbing .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54307526

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 6:50 pm So a Positive Private test soesnt count on
NHS track & trace ?

Thats a bit disturbing .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54307526

It’d be funny if it wasn’t a matter of life and death. They clearly released the app too soon before testing functionality. Amateur hour yet again.

BoniO wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 7:52 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 6:50 pm So a Positive Private test soesnt count on
NHS track & trace ?

Thats a bit disturbing .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54307526

It’d be funny if it wasn’t a matter of life and death. They clearly released the app too soon before testing functionality. Amateur hour yet again.

Its 1 calamity after another .

Its 1 calamity after another .


What do you expect with year 7 is in charge of the school & the fat oaf is Headmaster?

Can't be bothered to download the app.