Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My sister in law has been unemployed now for a year and a half and she keeps sending out a very poorly written and ineffective resume to hundreds of employers. That fulfills her obligation to the folks at the unemployment office and she continues to get a check every week.
I asked her if she is pulled into the unemployment office to meet with staff to discuss her job search. NO. I then asked her if she had read any books on resume and cover letter preparation. NO. Then I asked her if she ever had attended a seminar on job hunting skills. NO. Finally i asked her if she had ever met with someone from the job service to talk about her search for employment. NO!
I asked my sister in law if these services were available. She did not know and because they were not required to get a check she did not bother.
What services should be provided AND REQUIRED by the nice folks at the State offices providing unemployment insurance?
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 07-13-2010 at 10:17 AM..
Reason: Deleted unnecessary political comments.
I agree that unemployment offices should be providing more services than they do.
On the other hand, keep in mind that everyone on unemployment now, no matter how bad their job searching and resume preparation skills are, was previously able to obtain employment when economic conditions were stronger. That's not to say that people should keep doing what they have done in the past and expect that things will work out the same, since conditions are now very different.
Because things are very different, though, it's worth posing the question whether getting better at looking for a job will make you more likely to get one: unless there are jobs to be had, being really good at looking for one isn't necessarily going to help. As one example, my sister told me recently that she's heard of companies that don't even consider any applicants who are not currently employed. I don't think this is either a humane or intelligent way to do things, but if it is a common practice it demonstrates one reason that many unemployed workers will have a hard time finding a job.
Even without discrimination against unemployed workers, your idea raises a question in my mind: would doing things to improve the job searching skills of unemployed workers reduce total unemployment, or would it simply reallocate who gets hired for the limited number of available jobs?
Thanks for posting this provocative idea.
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 07-13-2010 at 10:17 AM..
Reason: Edited out references to deleted comments in previous post.
Bascailly there is no money to pay for this service. That is what we need to get use to in the futre;no mnaey for such services. The extensions themselves are not paid for ;so I see no one wanting to increase spending in this area on seminars.The system itself is already swamped dealing with nmbers never setup to deal with,
In my state, when a person draws unemployment, they are required to submit a "job search" with the names, addresses, etc of, I believe it is five potential employers each week, to prove they are looking for employment. Also, the jobless may check with the employment office to see if there are any jobs they have listed, but this isn't mandatory. Usually, and I am speaking about where I live, the employment office only has listing for temporary jobs. If an unemployed person accepts a temp job, they are disqualified to draw any more checks.
That is kind of like a dumb idea, as the money would be pennies compared to the regular check.
I don't know what you mean, tex dave, about there is no money for the service. So you mean for the unemployment checks? Employers pay into Unemployment Insurance on each employee beginning on their date of first employment from their payroll. Those benefits have been prepaid. Previously, benefits were paid based on the highest quarter of wages in the last year or so. Now, I believe benefits are paid based on the previous quarter of employment.
As for job hunting skills or resume writing assistance, I don't know that anyone does that free gratis and if someone is truly seeking employment they will get someone to help and some places still use applications.
I could never understand why a previous employer would deny someone their benefits because they have already paid in the money, it is not going to cost them any money at all. They do deny people and make it harder for them to draw the benefits.
It would be nice if the employment office would do more to help people find employment, like arrange for job fairs. There used to be quite a few job programs each summer for teens and some for older displaced workers. That is how I started my first job, and it lasted 20 years.
I could never understand why a previous employer would deny someone their benefits because they have already paid in the money, it is not going to cost them any money at all. They do deny people and make it harder for them to draw the benefits.
It's not the employer who denies the claim, it's the agency.
The reason the employers fight claims, often by making stuff up, is that having claims based on their employees can make their experience rating worse, which in turn increases their rate. Even though they've been paying taxes all along, once they start having claims it can cost them money.
Still, in my 30+ years of representing workers in unemployment cases, I have seen many more employers who lie or make stuff up to prevent claimants from collecting than I have seen claimants lie to receive benefits.
It's not the employer who denies the claim, it's the agency.
The reason the employers fight claims, often by making stuff up, is that having claims based on their employees can make their experience rating worse, which in turn increases their rate. Even though they've been paying taxes all along, once they start having claims it can cost them money.
Still, in my 30+ years of representing workers in unemployment cases, I have seen many more employers who lie or make stuff up to prevent claimants from collecting than I have seen claimants lie to receive benefits.
Exactly ;you represent your clients just as a attorney does his clients. You view is dominated by that view ;no doubt just as those who represent emplyers are effected.Being a advocate for one side tends to blur the entire picture ;most times
I know the job market is really tight but people are being hired every day even in this economy. You would think that if the State and Federal Government would hire people to help the unemployed who are collecting unemployment how to be a better job hunter and have a great looking resume that catches the eye of the employer the unemployed person could be the one hired for the jobs that are filled everyday. If the unemployed person collecting benefits can get back to work faster the government is going to save money in benefits costs. The small amount they would spend by in hiring people to help the unemployed be better job applicants would more than pay for itself with smaller benefits payments. I am specifically talking about the long term unemployed who are on a State or Federal Extension.
I am a conservative yet I feel unemployment insurance should NEVER stop being extended to someone as long as they are truly looking for a job. I would also like to see the state unemployment offices take more of a role in placing the unemployed in jobs instead of just issuing checks.
I would get the funds for unimited unemployment by cutting off the welfare of the non-working poor.,the type that wouldn't report to a job if you would hand it to them. The type hat collected welfare even back when jobs were plentyful.
I don't think the government should force people to attend seminars to collect their benefits since they earned them when they were working at their previous jobs. It is a "perc" you don't see on your paycheck because your employer is forced to pay for it by the government.
The government should provide them, and people should have enough common sense to attend these seminars, and if they do, perhaps they should be rewarded with an extra stipend in their weekly benefit if they do it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
