The Furlough clock ticks down to unemployment
The Furlough scheme is not a job saver, but a clock stopper – in that it freezes time so as to delay an impending catastrophe
The Furlough scheme is not a job saver, but a clock stopper – in that it freezes time so as to delay an impending catastrophe, like freezing an incoming tidal wave, transforming it into a wall of ice, but unable to prevent the sun’s rays from one day melting this barrier away.
The Furlough scheme was drafted in at the start of lockdown in March of last year as the sole replacement for people’s pay checks when the workplace became illegal to enter and commerce stopped dead in its tracks. London, perhaps the epicentre of Britain’s economy, resembled the opening scene from the film 28 Days Later.
To the Government’s credit, the Furlough avoided the mass chaos which unfolded in the U.S. where, without any similar care packages, lockdowns ensured that fourteen million lost their jobs between February and May. Countless Americans woke up to find that they could not feed their families, causing queues for food banks to stretch for over a mile in length.
While these scenes did not occur on this side of the pond, Furlough has only stretched this damage over a far longer period of time. In turn, the scheme has not accounted for the economic calamity caused by repeated lockdowns coupled with ongoing restrictions, such as mask-wearing and social distances, that further bites into a company’s profit line. Many on Furlough are receiving money for their jobs which do not exist anymore.
As such, when Furlough ends, the unemployment rate is going to shoot for the stars overnight. In particular, young people will be one of the hardest groups hit. A recent report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has concluded that, of those aged between nineteen and twenty-four, 350,000 are at risk from losing their jobs.
Despite composing much of the ‘in-person’ menial workforce when hospitality venues and brick and mortar shops were re-opened (hence why the IFS points out that young people were more likely to be placed on furlough), their middle-aged managerial counterparts have been able to work from home on full pay and benefits, with their expertise, connections, as well as position in the company providing some much-needed job security.
Young people, as well as the working-class, are usually the groups who fare the worst when economic downturn strikes (on a brief sidenote, why has the Labour Party consistently voted to send these two demographics into financial ruin?). The IFS has mentioned that disruptions to one’s employment now will have long-term consequences for the future, and given that young people have their whole lives in front of them, they may be able to detect this cold chill for the rest of their working lives.
Employers do not look favourably on those with gaps in their employment history, nor do they wish to take risks on those who are less experienced and capable when funds are tight and the company has lost confidence in the economy.
In addition, the year-long backlog caused by industry and commerce switching itself off due to lockdown has already caused the job market to become oversaturated (but without replacing the jobs that were lost). Young people who would have moved up the career ladder and into a specialised field couldn’t because no-one was hiring (of course, many were firing).
One day, the valve of the Furlough money tree will close, and the falling rotten structure will crush many in its wake.
