I don't get this line from the OECD's Stefano Scarpetta. Is anyone on furlough in any OECD country actually banned from moving employers/getting a new job?
Are they even disincentivised, really? Depends on the details of each country's furlough scheme, but if you know they writing is on the wall for your job, you're still incentivised to get a new one if you can. People aren't lazy dummies.
And are businesses really disincentivised from making layoffs? Recent spate of retail redundancies in UK suggests not.
With rising numbers in Britain too ill to work, it's time to ask the question: what if work itself is making us sick? It's not as physically hazardous as it used to be, but it seems to becoming more psychologically hazardous ft.com/content/3db7b2…
People report working harder, faster, to tighter deadlines than in the past (chart from @resfoundation)
People also say they have less control over how they work, especially those in lower-paid jobs.
Truss's slogan is "growth, growth, growth." One problem: most people don't know what GDP growth is. No-one is outside Downing Street chanting “What do we want? 2.5 per cent annual GDP growth. When do we want it? Over the medium term.” ft.com/content/c67c07…
That's not to say the public is ignorant about the economy or indifferent to it. People have a very good understanding of some economic concepts & follow them closely. Most notably interest rates and inflation.
Here's the problem for Truss and Kwarteng. Their mini-budget worsened the parts of the economy that people understand and care about, in pursuit of a target people don’t understand and don’t care about.
It’s in this context that cabinet is debating not updating benefits by inflation. Trouble is, people are already sinking. Making the poor poorer is a false economy right now, even if all you care about is growth & the public finances.
The best way to get tough on welfare spending is to get tough on the causes of welfare spending. Three quarters of the bill is spent on one of three things: income top-ups for low earners, housing benefit to help pay rent, and incapacity & disability payments for the unwell.
Are the British the worst idlers in the world? Let's fact-check these five assertions from Britannia Unchained (which was co-authored by our new PM and chancellor)... ft.com/content/65548d…
Social care jobs are jobs of the future. The sector employs about 2 per cent of the working-age population today and might well need to employ 4 per cent by 2033 to meet rising demand. The question is: do we want them to be bad jobs, or good ones? ft.com/content/2165c8…
The shortage of social care workers makes perfect sense. These are tough jobs but they no longer pay a premium to other low-paid jobs with better conditions. In 2012/13, care workers earned 13p an hour more than retail workers. By 2019/20, they earned 21p less.
Progression opportunities have also become worse. In 2013, care workers with five years’ experience typically earned 5 per cent more than colleagues with less than one year’s experience. In 2021, the premium had shrunk to just 1 per cent.