What Happens to Full Time Workers on Lockdown?

Luckyuser on 26/03/2020 - 20:26
Last edited 27/03/2020 - 00:20 by 1 other user

Hi all, with the COVID19 epidemic escalating pretty rapidly I was curious about the following:

With the lock down seemingly inevitable what happens to full time workers who have no annual leave.
My husband has 30 days annual leave but I know a few of his full time mates at the same job have none so what happens to them how do they survive? There job is not essential but until government shuts them down they’re still working. Would they be eligible for any help from Centrelink even if they have full time jobs

Also i couldn’t find a definitive answer but how long are gyms expected to be closed I read somewhere it was 6 months but unsure if that’s true or not.

Last question; how long could your family survive on lockdown? (finance wise). Luckily my family will be ok but 2 of my siblings have already been let go from their casual jobs.

Poll Options

  • 5
    1-2 weeks
  • 3
    1 month
  • 11
    2-3 months
  • 100
    6 months +
Education & Work

Comments

  • arkie0 on 26/03/2020 - 20:36
    +1

    1 day +1

    • Luckyuser on 26/03/2020 - 20:38

      Took me a little while to get what you meant lol. Hopefully you’re joking.

  • garetz on 26/03/2020 - 20:51

    I would vote for 3-6 months if you had it.

    Maybe even 6-9 months.

  • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 21:01
    +6

    Everything is changing ridiculously quickly, so who can say?
    As it stands today, the way most employers would handle it is to give the option to be "stood down", which I think means their employment ceases, and they would be eligible for government assistance (Job seeker allowance) at the new higher rate, from late April.
    This also implies they would be potentially rehired afterwards, but is not a guarantee.

    I think many employers would suggest employees might use their paid leave first. I don't know if there is a circumstance where you could say no and hope to get it paid out and still get access to the job seeker grant, but maybe, depending on other things like how much you have in available assets/savings.

    What I think is likely to happen is something like the UK or Norwegian arrangement, where the government will pay a percentage of the pay packet, with employers keeping the staff employed. If this approach happens here, expect it to be a mess, as many are already factoring in the job seeker approach.

    Lots of families and individuals don't have large savings to rely on, and have large regular commitments like mortgages and rent and car payments etc.
    It seems likely to me mortgage holders will be pressed to allow a mortgage pause, and the big banks are already looking at this.
    It also seems likely renters will be protected from eviction, but how or if they will have to make up back rent is not clear. I think it is likely there will be a 'catch up' rent plan at the end, but I can see lots of renters just skipping out on that.

    I think 6 months is not a foolish estimate for things like gyms. High contact things will be the last to return.

    My guess, is the government is delaying Job seeker and other payments till late April because they are hoping they can launch a tight lockdown for a month in the coming week or two, and then release it a month later - so they will end up with fewer payments than if they started paying sooner.

    If you are in heavily affected industries, like travel/airlines etc. this will go on substantially longer - more like the 6 months.

    The best outcome, which I suspect is slipping out of reach, is for a sharp, tight lockdown, with massive, repeated testing, then swarming all over new cases after the lockdown is eased, bit by bit. That will be likely a month of staying at home except once aweek groceries for everyone but essential (I mean really essential) workers.

    It is hard to answer how people who will hit zero on their bank balance will fair. I suspect we will see a run on cash in the next fortnight, as people withdraw their final pay and let the direct debits bounce - because it is better to be chased by debt collectors and have money to eat.

    • dcep on 26/03/2020 - 21:16
      +1

      with massive, repeated testing, then swarming all over new cases after the lockdown is eased,

      i thought we are still "criteria not met , no requirement for testing , not coronavirus , don't worry and go enjoy"

      • iampoor on 27/03/2020 - 09:30
        +1

        Pretty much - that was the response my whole family got.

        At this stage I'm the only one that is unwell, been self isolating from the community and from the family since last Thursday.

        Can't believe the excuses they use. If they do not have enough test kits just come out and say so, not give us some BS.

    • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 22:10
      +1

      The april payments are based on the economic qtr, by making them in april the 2nd qtr apr-june will show a job in economoc activity
      While the march qtr, its a write off.

    • Bargain80 on 27/03/2020 - 11:49

      even with total full lockdown, it will require more than 4 weeks.
      Look at China with their draconian measure. it took almost 2 months to get it under control. and they've only started easing down.
      Meaning many millions still can't work over there.

    • leiiv on 27/03/2020 - 15:27

      When a lot of people hit zero on their bank balance, there will be chaos, crime rate will go up. Mortgages will default, Will there be enough police to enforce evictions? People will start stealing from supermarkets, at least you still get food in prison. Or not.
      Without government guaranteeing a place to sleep and food to eat, a total lockdown will bring society to collapse. And how much will it cost to provide that?
      It will be much cheaper to pay whatever it takes to provide test kits for everyone and avoid lockdown.

  • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 21:08

    According to the 'leaked' US govt response plan, the pandemic is expected to last 18 months or longer and could include multiple waves of illness. (page 4)

  • ausmechkeyboards on 26/03/2020 - 21:22
    -1

    Luckily my line of work means it's unlikely I'd ever be unemployed. I'm already working remotely and can get a new job in a few days if I lose my job. But if I did have to stop working then my family is in a position where we could continue to maintain our current lifestyle for several years without additional income.

    • theHMASfriendship on 26/03/2020 - 21:26
      +5

      I'm already working remotely

      You must be a wireless keyboard then…

      • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 21:50

        No. He's a wireless mechanical keyboard.

        • theHMASfriendship on 26/03/2020 - 22:10
          +2

          Meesa sorry

          • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 22:19
            +4

            @theHMASfriendship: Yousa besa more careful in da future Mistah or me think yousa dumb-dumb :p

    • Some Guy on 26/03/2020 - 22:08
      -1

      So you were a shut-in before the 'rona too?

    • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 23:07

      I think this is admirable, but I kind of balance this against the idea that was very prevalent just 3 or 4 years ago where piling into property was the advice for riches.
      And to be truthful, I have been conservative with my money for 20 years after a couple of speculative losses as a youngster. And I missed millions in capital gains if I had followed the herd into property in the early 2000s.

      I guess if I had a well paying secure job like a doctor or (actually, hard to think of something else as high paying and thoroughly protected), I would take many more investment risks, as the income is likely to always be there. When thinking about lifetime wealth, it isn't all about nominal income, or about security, but about balancing the two to be secure and maximise outcomes (note: outcomes doesn't equate to riches)

  • cjbowden on 26/03/2020 - 22:23
    +12

    Being 'stood down' is not the same as being retrenched. A stand down is temporary, and only applicable in certain cases (a directive from the Government to close is one of them). Technically you are still employed, so there is no redundancy package. In this situation, the Government has agreed to pay Jobseeker benefits to anyone who has been stood down because of Covid-19. Everyone who work closes because of Government directives goes onto Jobseeker allowance until such time their workplace reopens, or they find a different job.

    • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 23:09
      +2

      Thanks for this, the media hasn't made this clear. So it is more like a pause on employment, with some of the usual job seeker eligibility rules exempted.

  • cjbowden on 26/03/2020 - 22:24

    Oh, and you can choose to use unused annual leave instead of leave without pay, but then you dont get Jobseeker.

  • Donaldhump on 26/03/2020 - 23:13
    +3

    If your stood down and your other half earns more than 45k you dont get the Job Seeker allowance, so essentially ****ing useless.

    how the hell can you survive on 45k a year feeding a family and kids.

    i think this will hurt many people

    government should just pay 75% of everyones wage, and all rent/loans frozen interest included (banks to rba nd banks to banks as well) for 1 month, and shut up shop completely, i still see people cruising around. Either do this 100% or dont.

    why hair dressers are open is beyond me, this is the time for everyone to get skullets and dye their hair blue or something.

    possible ideas
    * have suburb lockdowns
    * be allocated a day every fortnight you can go out, so your always in the same 1/14th of the population

    • Luckyuser on 27/03/2020 - 00:18

      Yes well luckily for me it’s just my husband and our 18 month old and I, I’m a SAHM and he works earning just below 100k a year. I’m not sure what rules would apply to him should he need to go on the job seeker payment if the lockdown should last longer than his annual leave. And as it is I’m currently getting about $200 a fortnight from Centrelink but it isn’t paid out until after the financial year as to avoid an overpayment. We will be okay but then there’s others I worry about, like one of my brothers who has a lot of expenses should this go longer than his annual leave I’m not sure how he’d manage on $1100 a fortnight with a wife and 2 kids.

    • dudebargain on 27/03/2020 - 07:00

      Is that really the case? If my partner gets laid off and I earn more than 45K, she not eligible for any centerlink payments? I thought the asset tests were paused for the time being.

      • LuffyTuffyFluffy on 27/03/2020 - 08:31

        It's the liquid assets (cash) test they're waiving. Partner income and (tangible) assets still applies.

        • Bargain80 on 27/03/2020 - 11:51

          that's the current situation but I heard they are still reviewing the situation and might change the condition.

        • Donaldhump on 27/03/2020 - 14:16
          +2

          yes you could have 10 million in the bank and get it

          or

          have $1 in the bank, and a partner who earns 46k and not get it.

          super retarded yet again

    • Austaurean on 27/03/2020 - 08:36

      I think we could all 'survive' many people do., the difference is most of us on any real income, as a single or 2 person income have Home Loans and that's where we all fall apart in surviving financially.

      The others are generally within Public Housing at a much reduced rental rate.

  • Ryanek on 26/03/2020 - 23:55

    Your husbands hours may be cut down. A lot of companies are reducing their employees working days to survive.

  • johno3456 on 27/03/2020 - 03:17

    There are plenty who have survived for years without a paying job. Ok it may be difficult in the home burglary, dealing business or fencing stuff out of the back of a van but there are other opportunities. Watch to stage 4 when the banks are shut.

    More seriously, there will be alot of unemployed people and some will never recover. I would use the annual leave cause soon smaller businesses will go under, taking any remaining entitlements with them.

  • Trekky on 27/03/2020 - 09:16

    I work for an essential service (Electricity). I am office based and we are starting to do the work from home thing. So I would be working from home with full pay. So I consider myself VERY lucky and feel awlful about what's happening to Aussie workers right now and into the is new future we have.

  • Allwentmarching on 27/03/2020 - 09:39

    My husbands work is staying open. Im on maternity leave and can hopefully mostly WFH when I come back. Technically we arent supposed to WFH with children on the premises as its against insurance but I wonder if they might relax those rules given the emergency nature of the situation.

    We are a fair bit ahead on our mortgage so financially we will be OK for a while. Supplies wise we dont have that much extra because my kids go through food really quickly and we got caught out by the panic buyers as we were on a camping trip. But we do have a 24 pack TP so I guess we could eat that haha

  • OzHunterNSW on 27/03/2020 - 09:58

    Ask them…. ask your husband

    • Luckyuser on 27/03/2020 - 10:51

      I have he said they’d use annual leave but they’re trying to work out a deal which would let them use their sick leave first.

      But I’m curious about other full time workers who have none at all what their options would be, especially those going from $2000-3000 a fortnight to $1100 a fortnight on job seeker who have mortgages to pay and more kids to feed.

      • OzFrugie on 27/03/2020 - 23:15

        Good point on using sick leave first. Why hasnt this been suggested in public or by union or by govt?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join