Without financial support from the government, women will be hit hardest by omicron

Women paid the heaviest price over the last two years and it will be women, once again, that feel the impact of Covid restrictions

Yesterday, the health secretary Sajid Javid addressed parliament and argued his case for introducing restrictions in order to combat the spread of the omicron variant. The government, he claimed, had learnt lessons from previous waves and variants and knew it needed to act quickly to reduce pressure on the NHS. Whether these moves will be sufficient, it is encouraging that the government is looking to fire-proof the NHS. But their approach does beg the question: what is it doing to fire-proof people’s livelihoods? So far, it seems, very little, and it will be women that once again pay the price for this failure to act.

We know from first – and indeed, second time around – that restrictions, as necessary as they might be, will impact differently on women and men. According to the Institute of Fiscal Studies, women were one-third more likely to work in a sector that was shutdown than men – sectors such as hospitality, non-essential retail, or leisure. And while the government has arguably taken a relatively light-touch to current restrictions so far, it cannot curb the spread of omicron-induced anxiety.

The news is awash with reports of cancellations in bars, restaurants and hotels amid concerns about the variant, and yesterday Nicola Sturgeon asked people in Scotland to limit gatherings to just three households, essentially putting the kibosh on Christmas parties without officially putting the kibosh on Christmas parties. Many people are also turning to online shopping in place of the Christmas crush on the high street in order to limit their contacts.

All of this will inevitably lead to a downturn in revenue which could, in turn, lead employers to consider cutting staff hours. With no furlough in place, this will be a devastating blow for staff, particularly those on zero hours contracts at a time when their industry and its workers, largely female, are only just recovering. Impacted sectors like hospitality, retail and leisure are also historically among the lowest paid, meaning that workers are unlikely to be able to absorb the shock to their earnings.

Alongside this, the virus is once again running rampant through schools. We saw in previous waves that it was mothers who bore the brunt of this additional caregiving. Earlier this year, research by the Women’s Budget Group and other organisations found that mothers on the lowest incomes were eight times more at risk of losing their job due to school closures or self-isolating children in previous waves, than those earning over £40,000. They were also twice as likely as fathers to take unpaid leave from work to look after children during those previous waves.

Simply put, women have paid the heaviest price over the last two years and it will be women, once again, that feel the impact of omicron if the government fails to introduce financial support. Almost two years into the pandemic, statutory sick pay remains a paltry £96 a week, not enough to live on by the former health secretary Matt Hancock’s own admission. Ten per cent of women don’t even earn enough to qualify for this meagre payment. Of course, all of this comes hot on the heels of the £20 cut to Universal Credit, a move which is likely to have a greater impact on women according to research by Stepchange.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices newsletter by clicking here

The government doesn’t have to legislate for restrictions in order to influence public behaviour; warnings of a “tsunami” of cases and addresses to the nation will do that job for them. To knowingly influence public behaviour without providing appropriate financial support is negligent.

If this government is as keen as it says to learn from previous waves, then it needs to act now to limit the impact of that changed behaviour. That means reintroducing the furlough scheme, starting immediately with sectors who have experienced a downturn in trade as a result of public concern, reinstating the £20 Universal Credit uplift and, in a move that is well overdue, increasing the rate of statutory sick pay. Without these measures, we’ll see our most economically vulnerable groups absorb the impact of yet another wave, and if we’re following the government’s lead and relying on the data, we know that will be women.

Mary-Ann Stephenson is director of the Women’s Budget Group