Entrepreneurs want full cost compensation.
Almost half Companies in the region of Southwest Finland would lose turnover if movement restrictions were tightened.
The matter is clear in a survey of the Turku Chamber of Commerce, which was answered within three days by the CEOs of 203 companies in various fields. 60% of the companies are located in Turku.
About 45% of respondents anticipate that their turnover would decline as a result of a possible curfew. Turnover would fall by more than 50% in about 12% of companies.
At 52%, turnover would remain unchanged and at around 3% it would increase if the curfew came into force.
Government the draft restrictions on movement state that ‘necessary movement is permitted for the performance of official or employment-related tasks or for the pursuit of a trade or business’. There is not yet precise information on how necessity would be interpreted here.
Indeed, many CEOs in the region called for job travel and commuting to continue to be allowed. In this way, the negative effects of the curfew would be kept to a minimum.
Maintaining logistics processes is also vital for many companies:
– If the production staff and logistics staff do not have the opportunity to do their job, the turnover will drop to zero immediately and all our staff will be laid off immediately, one CEO said in his reply.
In the answers emphasis was placed on the desire for the most limited and targeted restrictions possible. Respondents hoped that decisions would also consider their impact on business and the economy.
– When decisions are made on new restrictions, it must be decided at the same time to compensate companies for their adverse effects. The exceptional situation has now lasted so long that the sustainability of many fundamentally viable companies has been taken to the extreme by the effect of the corona on the one hand and by restrictive measures on the other. Kaisa Leiwo says.
Companies are hoping for a similar opportunity for quick layoffs, as well as support and facilitations for payments, like last spring.
– One should be given the opportunity to lay off immediately without a co-determination procedure and, in addition, to have fixed costs at the peak of the state, one respondent said.
– I would consider it important to have longer-term relief for companies, such as reductions in employer contributions or taxes, another commented.
Many responses reiterated the hope that the costs of the closure would be fully offset.
Companies understand the need to cut off the spread of the corona, and many respondents said they are prepared to tolerate reasonable restraint if they result in a shortened state of emergency in its entirety. In any case, stopping the pandemic is seen in the long run as the best safeguard for business continuity.
However, the targeting of actions needs to be carefully considered.
– It would be best not to need any general containment measures, but to target measures where infections occur the most, one respondent says.
Source site www.is.fi