The Reader: Self-isolating freelancers need sick-pay protection

6 March 2020
WEST END FINAL

Get our award-winning daily news email featuring exclusive stories, opinion and expert analysis

I would like to be emailed about offers, event and updates from Evening Standard. Read our privacy notice.

The Government has made concessions with regards to sick pay and Covid-19, but it is completely ignoring one vital group of workers — the self-employed.

My union Prospect represents thousands of freelancers. For them, taking two weeks off to self-isolate will leave a huge hole in their family’s finances. What’s worse is that many may not even realise that they will be out of pocket, as they have insurance which is meant to cover them when they have days off due to sickness. Unfortunately some of our members have been told by their insurance firms that self-isolation is a personal choice, so they are not covered.

The Prime Minister has said that nobody will lose out, but unless there is urgent action then his words will ring hollow with thousands of workers. The Tories have made a lot of hay trumpeting about the fall in unemployment, in large part due to increases in self-employment. They must not let those people suffer for doing the right thing.
Mike Clancy, General Secretary, Prospect

Editor's reply

Dear Mike

It is remarkable how rapidly this issue has highlighted the fault lines at the heart of our modern economy.

For the five million people reportedly working in the gig economy, the onus has fallen on them to decide whether they pose a risk to others, unlike in large organisations where coronavirus policies are being hastily drawn up.

One freelancer I spoke to said carving out two weeks a year to take a holiday was hard enough, and his biggest fear is falling ill and losing out on income. Income protection insurance has been a beacon of hope for some self-employed workers during this crisis, so it’s alarming to hear some are not covered.

Another concern is that because the self-employed are often sole traders, busily spending their days behind the till or the wheel of a van, their voice won’t be heard as loud as that of big business, but their need for government support is just as great. Their importance to the economy must not be forgotten.
Alex Lawson, Business News Editor

Labour needs to stay united

Jeremy Corbyn
Getty Images

It is disingenuous of Ian Austin [“Labour is on life support and there’s no one to cure it,” March 4 ] to sneer at Hackney and Islington voters or play the Northerner card when, within days of the Brexit referendum being announced, Jeremy Corbyn was down this way in Hastings listening to the fishing fleet.

The truth is this is a straight Left-Right contest with very powerful interests lined up against Labour. When the Labour Right disregards party unity in a way it would rage about if in power, we end up with the egocentric, totalitarian-inclined Government that we have currently.
Steve Gooch

Simplify climate change debate​

In the fight against climate change, a valid point is being made about the science behind the environmental, social and governance (ESG) rating systems being dismal [“Sustainability is all the rage but the metrics are muddy,” March 3]. It’s true no one can agree what ESG means or if it matters. Yet ESG scores are becoming more important in investing and markets. As JFK said: “We aren’t here to curse the darkness but to light a candle that can guide us…” Making this debate simpler would strike the match.
Dr Andy Sloan, Deputy chief executive of strategy, Guernsey Finance

20mph speed limits save lives​

Jon Wallsgrove [The Reader, March 3 ] expresses concern about 20mph speed limits on TfL roads in the C-charge zone. We are pleased to say that the evidence is to the contrary, and 20mph limits reduce the numbers of people killed and can help improve air quality. A London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine study in 2009 found the number of people killed and seriously injured fell by 42 per cent where speeds were reduced to 20mph.

A file image of a 20mph speed limit sign
Dominic Lipinski/PA

With air quality, Imperial College research shows little difference between 20mph and 30mph in urban driving and reports: “It would be incorrect to assume a 20mph restriction would be detrimental to local air quality as the effects on vehicle emissions are mixed.”

Fuel consumption/emissions are driven by the fuel used in repeated acceleration and the energy needed is proportional to the terminal speed squared. Hence the energy required to repeatedly reach 30mph is 2.25 times greater than to get to 20mph.
Jeremy Leach, London campaign co-ordinator, 20’s Plenty for Us

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in