Coronavirus (COVID-19): impact on wellbeing - research

Chapter 1. Employment and income

This chapter covers respondents' experiences with changes to their work patterns and income as well as accessing necessities.

Changes to employment

Respondents who were employed at the start of March were asked if they had experienced any changes to their work. The vast majority (87%) had experienced some change since the start of the Coronavirus crisis. As shown in Figure 1, the most common changes were moving to working from home (32%), being furloughed (26%), working a different pattern of hours (23%) or working fewer hours than usual (20%). Only 13% of respondents had experienced no change to their employment.

Base: All who were working full-time, part-time or were self-employed at the start of March this year (572)

Figure 1 Description

This bar chart shows the proportions of respondents who have experienced changes in their work since March, across 13 response options. These options are ‘changed to work from home’, ‘been furloughed’, ‘working a different pattern of hours’, ‘working fewer hours than usual’, ‘made adjustments to combine work with childcare’, ‘working more hours than usual’, ‘taken paid leave’, ‘taken unpaid leave’, ‘taken a pay cut but working the same hours’, ‘lost your job or been made redundant’, ‘left job, retired or gone on maternity leave’, ‘working in a new job’ and ‘none of the above’. It shows ‘changed to working from home’ was the most common response (32%), and 13% of respondents reported no change.

Subgroup differences - changes to employment

Men were more likely to have been furloughed than women (31% compared with 22%), while women were more likely than men to be working more hours than usual (18% compared with 10%).

Those in younger age groups were more likely than older age groups to have experienced changes to their employment:

• 42% of those aged 16-24 and 34% of those aged 25-34 had been furloughed, compared with 21% of those 35-54 and 25% of those aged 55-69
• Those aged 16-24 were more likely to have taken paid leave (12%) than those aged 25-34 (4%) and 55-69 (3%)
• Those aged 35-54 were more likely to be having to make adjustments to combine work with looking after children (23%) than those aged 16-24 (0%), 25-34 (12%) and 55-69 (1%)

Those in the most deprived areas were more likely to have lost their job or been made redundant (6%) than those in least deprived areas (1%), while those in the least deprived areas were more likely to have changed to working from home (46%) than those in the three more deprived areas (16%-33%).

Those in rural areas were more likely than those in urban areas to be working a different pattern of hours (31% compared with 20%) and working more hours than usual (22% compared with 12%).

Accessing food and medicine, and financial problems

Respondents were asked if they were experiencing difficulties accessing food and medicine, or having financial problems. As shown in Figure 2, the majority (81%) had not experienced any difficulties. However, a minority reported difficulties 'getting the food or medicine you need' (10%), 'paying other bills' (8%) 'paying rent or mortgage' (7%) and 'paying energy bills'.

Base: All (1000)

Figure 2 Description

This bar chart shows the proportions of respondents who have experienced difficulties since the beginning of March, from 7 response options, namely ‘getting the food or medicine you need’, ‘paying other bills’, ‘paying rent or mortgage’, ‘paying energy bills’, ‘collecting pensions or benefits’, ‘being evicted or at risk of eviction’, or ‘none of these’. It shows that ‘none of those’ was the most common response (81%).

Subgroup differences - accessing food and medicine, and financial problems

Those in younger age groups were more likely to have had problems accessing the things they needed than older age groups. In particular, those aged 16-24 were more likely to have experienced difficulties getting the food or medicine they need (16%) than those aged 25-34 and 55-69 (both 8%). As shown in Table 1, those in younger age groups were also more likely to have had problems paying bills than those in older age groups.

Table 1: Difficulties paying bills by age group

Age	Paying other bills	Paying rent or mortgage	Energy bills
16-24	16%	8%	5%
25-34	11%	11%	6%
35-54	9%	9%	10%
55-69	4%	3%	2%
70+	1%	-	-

Base: 16-24 (127) 25-34 (150) 35-54 (325) 55-69 (255) 70+ (143)

Those in households with children were more likely than those without children to have had difficulties:

• Paying energy bills (9%, compared with 4%)
• Paying rent or mortgage (10%, compared with 5%)
• Paying other bills (11%, compared with 6%)

Disabled respondents were also more likely than non-disabled respondents to have had difficulties getting food and medicine (26% compared with 5%), paying other bills (14% compared with 6%), paying energy bills (11% compared with 4%) and collecting pensions or benefits (5% compared with 1%).

Reasons for difficulties getting food or medicine

Respondents who had experienced difficulties getting food or medicine were asked to choose the reasons for this, from the list shown in Figure 3. The most common reasons were that the things they needed were not available (45%), followed by not being able to get to the shop (38%) and not being able to get a delivery slot (35%).

Base: All who have had difficulties getting the food and medicine they need (84)

Figure 3 Description

This bar chart shows the main reasons for difficulties getting food or medicine, amongst respondents who indicated having experienced difficulties in a previous question (84 respondents). It shows the proportions who selected between five response options, ‘You couldn’t get to the shops’, ‘You couldn’t get a delivery slot’, ‘The things you needed were not available’, ‘You couldn’t afford the cost of the food or medicine you needed’ and ‘Don’t know’. It shows the most common reason was ‘The things you needed were not available’ (45%).

Changes in income

Respondents were asked if they had experienced any changes in their income since the start of March. As shown in Figure 4 below, the majority (59%) of respondents had not experienced a change in income. However, almost a third (32%) had a lower income than before the Coronavirus pandemic. A minority (8%) had a higher income than usual.

Base: All (1000)

Figure 4 Description

This bar chart shows the proportions of respondents who indicated their income since the end of March was ‘a lot higher than usual’, ‘a little higher than usual’, ‘about the same as usual’, ‘a little lower than usual’, ‘a lot lower than usual’ or who responded ‘don’t know’. It shows that most respondents answered their income was about the same as usual (59%).

Subgroup differences - changes in income

Those in younger age groups were more likely than older age groups to have a lower income compared with the start of March. In particular, those aged 16-24, 25-34 and 35-54 were more likely to say their income was lower than usual (35%, 51% and 39%) than those aged 55-69 and 70+ (23% and 2% respectively). Those in the 25-34 age group were the most likely to say their income was lower, while those aged 70+ were the least likely.

Households with children were more likely to have a lower income than usual (44%, compared with 26% of those in households without children). However, they were also slightly more likely to have a higher income (12% of households with children compared with 7% of households without).

Those in the most deprived areas were also more likely to have a higher income than usual (13%) than those in the least deprived (6%).

Coping with changes in income

Respondents whose income was lower than at the start of March were asked what actions they had taken to help them manage. As shown in Figure 5, the majority (55%) had cut back on non-essential spending, including luxury items or activities or going out. A minority had used savings (17%), applied for universal credit (14%) and cut back on essential items such as food (14%), while small proportions had taken a mortgage or rent holiday (7%), reduced mortgage or rent payments (5%) or applied for a Council Tax reduction / exemption or other benefits (5%).

Base: All whose household income is lower than at the start of March (308)

Figure 5 Description

This bar chart shows the main actions taken by respondents to help them manage with a lower income, amongst respondents who indicated that their income is lower than at the start of March (308 respondents). It shows the proportions who selected between 12 difference options, namely, ‘Spent less on non-essential/ luxury items or activities/ going out’, ‘Used savings’, ‘Applied for Universal Credit’, ‘Cut back on essential items such as food’, ‘Stopped mortgage/ rent payments (taken a mortgage or rent holiday)’, ‘Reduced your mortgage/ rent payments (paid less each month)’, ‘Applied for Council Tax reduction/ exemption or other benefits’, ‘Taken out a loan/ borrowed money (including from friends or family)’, ‘Applied for crisis grant through the Scottish Welfare fund’, ‘Got food from a food bank’, ‘Something else (specify)’ or ‘Nothing’. The chart shows that the most common reason given was ‘Spent less on non-essential/ luxury items or activities/ going out’ (55%) and that 21% answered ‘nothing’.

Subgroup differences - coping with changes in income

Women were more likely than men to have cut back on essential items such as food to help manage with a lower income (20% compared with 7%) and to have stopped mortgage or rent payments (11% compared with 4%).

The actions taken to help manage with a lower income also differed by age group, with those in the middle or younger age groups more likely to have cut back on spending and older age groups more likely to have relied on savings:

• Those aged 25-34 and 35-54 were more likely to say they had spent less on non-essential or luxury items (58% and 59% respectively) than those aged 55-69 (39%)
• Those aged 25-34 were more likely to say they had applied for universal credit (19%) than those aged 55-69 (6%)
• Those aged 35-54 were more likely to say they had stopped mortgage or rent payments (13%) than those aged 16-24 (1%) or 55-69 (3%)
• Those aged 35-54 and 55-69 were more likely to say they had used savings (20% and 24% respectively) than those aged 16-24 (5%)

Households with children were more likely to have applied for a council tax reduction or other benefits, compared with households without children (10% and 2% respectively). Conversely, households without children were more likely to say that they had not done anything to help manage on a lower income (25% compared with 12% of those in households with children).

Those in more deprived areas were also more likely to have applied for universal credit than those in less deprived areas. Around a quarter of those in the two most deprived areas had applied (26% and 24% respectively), compared with the three less deprived areas (5%-9%).