Virgin Atlantic ask their staff to take 8 weeks unpaid leave

[Zak33]

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...leave-11958150

the airlines have taken such a mammoth drop in traffic, that over a 3 month period, the staff are to be asked to be not working and unpaid for 8 weeks in those 12 weeks

that's gonna hurt!!

[Andeh13]

My neighbor works for them (pilot), he also had a paycut in the preceding weeks. He was not a happy bunny, to then have our pub trip cancelled last night was the icing on the cake for him!

[[GSV]Trig]

So in short, protecting the company at the cost of the staff?

[Kumagoro]

I wonder can you claim unemployment and other associated benefits in those sort of circumstances?

As long as I could and when I go back to work get the same contract and benefits then I think that is a pretty good deal. I have heard many people have already lost their jobs.

The stock market has dropped about 35% from peak, I am surprised it is doing that well really. Not a time to be buying a house I reckon.

[TeePee]

I wonder can you claim unemployment and other associated benefits in those sort of circumstances?

As long as I could and when I go back to work get the same contract and benefits then I think that is a pretty good deal. I have heard many people have already lost their jobs.

Typically yes, you would be eligible for unemployment under these circumstances, and your airline would be required to recall you (at your seniority pay) rather than hire a replacement.

[pp05]

After the crash in 2008, people were asked to take pay cuts rather than be made redundant.

[Spud1]

So in short, protecting the company at the cost of the staff?

To be fair to the company - if you don't protect the company & cash flow, everyone loses their jobs anyway.

This is a problem that is already affecting thousands of business and it will only affect more in the coming days imo. If you are not able to work from home, and can't go into your office/shop/whatever, what do you do?

It's not the company's fault they have to close the office, its not the employees fault they can't work - it's not even the government's fault (or ours, as taxpayers) either...so who pays? The company isn't a charity and I think a lot of people have a huge sense of entitlement to be paid in this scenario - which isn't really very fair.

Most businesses (inc ours) are doing all they can to survive in a world where work is drying up, contracts are not being signed, invoices are not being paid...and most are also doing everything they can for their staff and paying them for as long as is viable - but there is a limit.

It's going to be very hard for many

[Hoonigan]

I tell you what, I might not know much about economics or business, but the way companies are treating their staff right now will, as a consumer, absolutely influence my decisions in the future.

Mr Branson, as one of the richest people on the planet, should be covering their wages.

[adidan]

Makes the idea of every citizen having a basic wage and doing away with benefits, tax credits and so on seem like a good option.

[Ttaskmaster]

Mr Branson, as one of the richest people on the planet, should be covering their wages.

Yes, he is "estimated" to be worth £3.8 billion, and 2% interest on that (which would take a year to come through) would adequately cover what people "estimate" this cost to be... according to The Metro, anyway.

But what makes you think he can just reach into his pocket and readily splash some cash? Are rich people not rich because they sink all their money into investments?
Invested money tends to be tied up and rather inaccessible without a lot of advance notice. Besides, he's already spent a fair chunk of cash this financial year on other philanthropic activities.

It's never as simple as just demanding the rich pay for everything, which is what Labour have yet to realise.

[AC81]

Businesses will still have costs, but with little to no income.
It makes sense, and if we can all expect a shutdown of our workplaces in the coming days/weeks. Most of us can expect the same. Without it, there's a fair chance the job won't be there once the shutdowns over.
And even with it, many businesses will struggle to stay open.

[TeePee]

The economic damage of this virus panic dwarfs the damage the virus will actually do. It could last for years.

[BobF64]

Indeed, it isnt the shutdown that is necessarily the biggest issue, once the shutdown ends, it will take time for a lot of businesses to get back up again, a lot wont make it because they rely on external factors, like consumers.

It's a bit like stopping at traffic lights, some cars will manage to pull away quickly, others slowly and some will stall and be left behind.

[jim]

I tell you what, I might not know much about economics or business, but the way companies are treating their staff right now will, as a consumer, absolutely influence my decisions in the future.

Mr Branson, as one of the richest people on the planet, should be covering their wages.

Only problem with that is that Branson doesn't actually own Virgin Atlantic any more directly. Delta are the other owners.

I do agree that he could have done far more, but it isn't a private venture where he can make decisions in isolation.

[TooNice]

Businesses will still have costs, but with little to no income.
It makes sense, and if we can all expect a shutdown of our workplaces in the coming days/weeks. Most of us can expect the same. Without it, there's a fair chance the job won't be there once the shutdowns over.
And even with it, many businesses will struggle to stay open.

I know at least one business (a ski resort) that had to close it's door permanently. Business was slow at the start of the season due to the poor snowfall, and the virus finished the job.

If you don't have a pretty decent reserve of money (which can apply to many start up) a few weeks without business may well finish you..