[ozlo]

Amazing. If this bill passes, the burden of proof will be shifted to the employee rather than the former employer. Thus, for anyone to file for unemployment they will have to provide written documentation that they were fired or laid off. Since when do companies provide documentation about employees they terminate (unless it is for misconduct)? If passed, they definitely will not be providing any documentation for either an employee terminated OR laid off -- it will not be in their best interest to do so.
Yeah, they're going to drastically drop the unemployment rate overnight....by preventing almost everyone from even filing in the first place! Official unemployment numbers will be less than 1%, yet jobless people will be increasing exponentially out in the streets!


Excerpt below:

....
The House bill calls for cutting state unemployment benefits from 26 to 20 weeks. It would not affect the federal jobless program that kicks in after a claimant exhausts state benefits. The federal program offers a maximum of 73 extra weeks, although not everyone receives that much.

The bill would also require applicants to complete a job-skills assessment, reduce the tax employers now pay to fund unemployment and tie the length of benefits to the jobless rate.

If the unemployment rate were 9 percent or higher, the maximum weeks would be 20. If the rate fell to 5 percent or below, total available weeks would be 12.

The bill would eliminate a long-standing provision in state law that requires eligibility to be "liberally construed" in favor of workers. That means if a worker applies for benefits but the employer challenges the claim – saying, for example, that the worker was guilty of gross misconduct – the referee hearing the dispute should give the benefit of the doubt to the worker.
....

Florida looking to cut unemployment costs - OrlandoSentinel.com

[chopchop0]

FYI:

The House bill calls for cutting state unemployment benefits from 26 to 20 weeks. It would not affect the federal jobless program that kicks in after a claimant exhausts state benefits. The federal program offers a maximum of 73 extra weeks, although not everyone receives that much.

The lion's share of benefits come from the federal program and it's not affected.

Can't say I disagree with this part either:

The bill would eliminate a long-standing provision in state law that requires eligibility to be "liberally construed" in favor of workers. That means if a worker applies for benefits but the employer challenges the claim – saying, for example, that the worker was guilty of gross misconduct – the referee hearing the dispute should give the benefit of the doubt to the worker.

Florida's business lobby is pushing hard to remove the "liberally construed" language, claiming it allows undeserving workers to collect unemployment.

Especially when you consider that

Florida depleted its unemployment trust fund long ago and has since been paying benefits with loans from the federal government. It has borrowed about $2 billion and faces an interest payment this year of $64 million.

And seriously --- 99 weeks of UE? http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...means-not-work

[vaughanwilliams]

What do you expect with republicans in charge? Just when I think this state couldn't get any more anti-labor, along comes a stinker like this.

[dlhanson]

Originally Posted by ozlo

Excerpt below:

Florida looking to cut unemployment costs - OrlandoSentinel.com

This is great. Unemployment "insurance" costs are a road block to employers hiring workers. And the unemployment payments are keeping some of the unemployed from going back to work because it is easier not to work.

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by dlhanson

This is great. Unemployment "insurance" costs are a road block to employers hiring workers. And the unemployment payments are keeping some of the unemployed from going back to work because it is easier not to work.

Bingo. Small businesses can't expand in this environment with continued tight credit. Not necessarily true for the big corps, as they have been sitting on mountains of $$$$.

[bbronston]

As is always the case, there are other sides to consider. First, the Florida money that funds the unemployment benefit program comes from employers, not employees. Employees do not fund unemployment through deductions or anything else. We need more jobs in Florida and we need to attract more businesses here to get the jobs. Reducing the burden on employers makes doing business in Florida a more attractive proposition; this is just one facet of what needs to be done.
Yes, people need to eat and pay their rent but the money must come from some place. For a long time, government has been signing blank checks and throwing money blindly at every need and pet project that came along. Our states and country are practically bankrupt now. There is no choice left but to cut everything back and yes, that is going to cause many people some pain. There's no point in pretending anymore that these are just heartless republicans trying to hurt workers. This is the necessary beginning of a wave of responsible government that is long, long overdue. I have had to rely on unemployment twice in my life and those benefits didn't last anywhere near as long as the amount of time a currently unemployed worker may receive now. In the first instance, I found a new job, the other I became self-employed. This is a proposed reduction of a lot of free, unearned money that the government takes from employers, not an elimination of benefits. Even with this proposed change there is still plenty of safety net.

Regarding eligibility, the standards now are ridiculously lax. I fired an employee once for STEALING from me. I had witnesses and he admitted in writing that he stole the merchandise. Case closed, right? Uhhh...no. I even appealed the state's decision to give him unemployment benefits and he still got them. Then, he was hired by the US Postal Service! Government has been completely screwed up by well meaning but wrong thinking policy makers. It must (not should) change or we will all be in very bad trouble.

Finally, there are many community needs that go unaddressed. I think it is completely reasonable to ask all able-bodied recipients of welfare or other public money (your and my money that is confiscated by the federal government) to work at least some amount of time providing services that benefit the community. I'm sure that the unions will object but who cares. For those on unemployment, you and I both know that those people would rather have a job but we also know that they aren't really searching for a job 40 hours a week. Once they hit the federal money, I think the same community service requirement should also apply. It helps the community AND it helps the worker to get out and back into the world.

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by bbronston

Finally, there are many community needs that go unaddressed. I think it is completely reasonable to ask all able-bodied recipients of welfare or other public money (your and my money that is confiscated by the federal government) to work at least some amount of time providing services that benefit the community. I'm sure that the unions will object but who cares. For those on unemployment, you and I both know that those people would rather have a job but we also know that they aren't really searching for a job 40 hours a week. Once they hit the federal money, I think the same community service requirement should also apply. It helps the community AND it helps the worker to get out and back into the world.

Great idea

[vaughanwilliams]

Originally Posted by bbronston

Finally, there are many community needs that go unaddressed. I think it is completely reasonable to ask all able-bodied recipients of welfare or other public money (your and my money that is confiscated by the federal government) to work at least some amount of time providing services that benefit the community. I'm sure that the unions will object but who cares. For those on unemployment, you and I both know that those people would rather have a job but we also know that they aren't really searching for a job 40 hours a week. Once they hit the federal money, I think the same community service requirement should also apply. It helps the community AND it helps the worker to get out and back into the world.

"Unions will object but who cares"- A; What Unions? This is Florida, after all. B; You'd care if it was your job being eliminated because some poor slob on unemployment is forced to do it.

"All able-bodied recipients of welfare or other public money...work at least some amount of time providing services..."
Does that include the CEOs and stockholders and owners of the Corporations and banks and small businesses that MY taxes bailed out and continue to bail out? Does it include developers and real estate agents that prosper because of sweet heart deals brokered with state and local governments? Or is it reserved for the person who has the audacity to need food stamps?
Call it a Tax Loophole, call it a Bailout, call it Too Big To Fail, call it Developers Not Paying For Infrastructure Improvements, it's all welfare and everyone sucks it down just like the poor do.

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by vaughnwilliams

"Unions will object but who cares"- A; What Unions? This is Florida, after all. B; You'd care if it was your job being eliminated because some poor slob on unemployment is forced to do it.

"All able-bodied recipients of welfare or other public money...work at least some amount of time providing services..."
Does that include the CEOs and stockholders and owners of the Corporations and banks and small businesses that MY taxes bailed out and continue to bail out? Does it include developers and real estate agents that prosper because of sweet heart deals brokered with state and local governments? Or is it reserved for the person who has the audacity to need food stamps?
Call it a Tax Loophole, call it a Bailout, call it Too Big To Fail, call it Developers Not Paying For Infrastructure Improvements, it's all welfare and everyone sucks it down just like the poor do.

End it all then. End all welfare, social and corporate, and i think we'll have some common ground there.

Until then, this seems like a reasonable idea to jumpstart job growth in the state.

[beachmouse]

Thing, is Florida has some of the lowest unemployment insurance rates in the country. They're artificially low and come nowhere close to what's needed for state budgets once the unemployment rate goes above about 5%. Study I saw was that rates really needed to something like triple in order for the state fund to be solvent and not suck away money from other parts of state coffers.

So the latest move is yet one more example of 'corporate welfare' and will likely do little to generate new jobs, given said rates are already extremely low by national standards.