Statutory sick pay in the UK ‘is far too low’ former health secretary Matt Hancock has told the Covid-19 inquiry, agreeing with many of the TUC’s criticisms of the payment system.
Hancock added that he would have doubled it.
He said: “Before the pandemic, I’d been on an internal government campaign to significantly increase sick pay. I’d double it if I had a magic wand.
“It’s far lower than the European average, it encourages people to go to work when they should be getting better.
“Having low sick pay encourages the spread of communicable diseases.
“Having higher sick pay… would encourage employers to do more to look after the health of their employees.”
During the onset of the Covid pandemic the government faced criticism over the poor rate of sick pay and its lack of accessibility, which led to tens of thousands of people continuing to work rather than isolating and recuperating.
Sam Jacobs, representing the TUC, acknowledged that the government in March 2020 had made sick pay available from day one (rather than day three).
Hancock responded: “So moving from three days to one day of payment was a small step, which obviously was necessary for the pandemic – and I enthusiastically embraced – but I would have gone far, far higher.”
Sickness absence rates
Statutory sick pay call for evidence launched
Lack of sleep blamed for 11% of sickness absence
Long-term sickness: sharp rise in people with multiple conditions
Earlier this month the government announced a consultation on statutory sick pay. It will look at whether the current level of sick pay, £109.40 per week, is sufficient, as well as several questions such as should the UK, like other countries in Europe, have a higher rate of SSP but grant it for a shorter period of time and whether SSP should be paid earlier than the fourth qualifying day of sickness absence.
The TUC pointed out that the UK went into the pandemic with the lowest rate of statutory sick pay in the OECD. It added that ministers’ lack of action on sick pay had “left millions brutally exposed to the pandemic”.
The union body accused ministers of sitting on their hands – despite knowing the sick pay system was “broken”.
At just £94 a week many workers faced a huge drop in earnings if they had to self-isolate on statutory sick pay, the TUC pointed out.
A freedom of information request has subsequently shown that more than double was spent on Eat Out to Help Out than was funding the self-isolation scheme. More than £800m was spent on East Out to Help Out which lasted just over a month.
By contrast, just £385m was spent on the self-isolation support scheme in total throughout its existence (around 18 months).
Commenting on Hancock’s comments on statutory sick pay at the Covid Public Inquiry, TUC assistant general secretary Kate Bell said:
“The failure to provide proper financial support was an act of self-sabotage that left millions brutally exposed to the pandemic.
“The government could have boosted sick pay and made sure everyone could get it. But they failed to and instead left a gaping hole in our defence against the virus.
Hancock also told the inquiry: “We needed isolation payments from the start. We got them in the end by September. And I pay tribute to the Trades Union Congress for their campaigning on this issue, which helped me get it over the line.”
He also praised Frances O’Grady, then general secretary of the TUC, saying she was a “great service to the country in the role that she was in and she made an argument that I very strongly believed in.”
Hancock also said school closures could have been avoided if a lockdown had been imposed earlier.
When asked why older people with Covid were discharged from hospital to care homes, he said more people would have caught Covid within hospitals, which would have been even worse than people catching it in care homes.
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more human resources jobs
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
