Use furlough scheme to help sick employees isolate, says think tank
The government should use the furlough scheme to encourage more workers to self-isolate at home, as the current statutory sick pay regime does not go far enough.
Self-isolating has continued to be a major factor used to control the spread of the Covid-19 virus throughout the pandemic, with all those with coronavirus symptoms urged to stay at home.
But according to the Resolution Foundation, the main support available for employees asked to self-isolated at home is statutory sick pay, which pays just £96 per week – less than a quarter of a typical employee’s earnings. This could force some individuals to go into work despite having Covid symptoms.
Using the furlough scheme to prop up self-isolation requests would not be inexpensive. The Resolution Foundation has estimated it would cost around £426m per month, up from the current £112m spent on statutory sick pay. However it would ensure workers retained 80 per cent of their previous earnings while self-isolating.
Resolution Foundation researcher Maja Gustafsson said: “Getting people to self-isolate at home is one of the important tools we have in combatting Covid-19. But asking workers to do that often involves a major financial sacrifice – and the UK’s sick pay regime has been woefully inadequate in providing the necessary support. Many more Covid infections will have taken place as a result.
“Coronavirus vaccines will take many months to roll out, so more workers will need to self-isolate at home to contain the spread of the virus next year. Given the failure of the current sick pay regime, the government must turn now to the far more successful job support schemes to provide workers and firms with the financial support they need to do the right thing.”
‘Expensive blanket schemes’
According to the think tank two million employees earning less than £120 per week are not eligible for statutory sick pay – a barrier that excludes one-in-four part-time workers, and one-in-seven workers in retail, hospitality and leisure – leaving them with no income at all if they self-isolate at home.
But according to Duncan Simpson, research director at the TaxPayers’ Alliance, the money could be better used elsewhere.
“It’s better for taxpayers to target furlough at those that definitely can’t work, rather than sticking to even more expensive blanket shutdown schemes,” he said.
“While such a system could be open to abuse, such as with false claims, the legal requirement to self-isolate means support is needed for struggling firms and the self-employed, who may be unable to cover the costs of workers having to stay at home.”
The Resolution Foundation has also called for tweaks to the self-employment income support scheme (SEISS) and the employment and support allowance (ESA) to make the schemes more generous.
A Treasury spokesperson said: “At the start of the pandemic we made statutory sick pay payable from day one and also extended it to those ill, self-isolating or shielding due to coronavirus.
“It is also the minimum amount an eligible employee is entitled to receive from their employer and over half of people receive more from their workplace through occupational sick pay. Those eligible also benefit from further support through measures such as the £500 Self-Isolation Support Payment Scheme and £20 a week increase to Universal Credit.”