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.
Indeed this is weird. If someone wants to work at a job, then get UI after getting let go, I don't have an issue with that.
If they want to scrape by for 4-6 months without a regular paycheck, then they are welcome to. but don't expect me to be sympathetic...
But I have applied for jobs that I had a 30% or less chance of getting as my experience was minimal, but had they hired me, I'd sure have done my best to learn it...
I'm OK with this. Lots of professionally unemployed will "apply" to jobs they know they won't get hired for, so they can say, "See? I tried. Now send me another check." Unemployment insurance has become just another grift. It's time to make a few examples and send the rest of the rats and cockroaches scurrying.
I'm OK with this. Lots of professionally unemployed will "apply" to jobs they know they won't get hired for, so they can say, "See? I tried. Now send me another check." Unemployment insurance has become just another grift. It's time to make a few examples and send the rest of the rats and cockroaches scurrying.
You really don't have the slightest clue how unemployment works, how a person qualify for payment, what are their work search requirements and thus why this legislative thing is about as stupid a solution some idiot politician could dream up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MongooseHugger
but the question is, who determines what is "unqualified"?
Ah, and that is what makes this so weird in the thinking. Unemployment has mandatory work search requirements to continue receiving benefits. This work search is based on suitability as defined by USDOL and state specific regulations. Ironically, all states have requirement that penalizes a person who seeks or accepts employment below their last standard. The encouragement is to go for the gold, not the crumpled gum wrapper. Under every state's regulations, applying for employment at or above your prevailing suitability comes with no risk of harming your on going benefit payments so spend the time seeking out employment in that arena. But, applying for employment below your prevailing suitability is froth with problems that could cause the loss of benefits.
Now, it is possible (I have seen this in certain other states) where the unemployment base is made up of inbred dolts who's employment prospects are mop-man for peep show booths or fry cook at JimmyBobs Homecooked Raccoons, yet they are applying for jobs with high tech firms for positions requiring specialized education ans skills. If the envelope is being pushed to the point it shreds apart, maybe there is some justification if they can clearly articulate the requirements. But, just because a person is applying above their level shouldn't be frowned upon. I mean, if the previous job was on a coffee maker assembly line and the got laid off, if the choices are Walmart cashier type employment of aircraft engine components manufacturing, which one would a person with half a brain go for?
make them show up and assign them public service duties for 2-3 days a week to collect UI :/
see if they rather be cheap labor for state, or find a job that they can control, get those potholes filled!
Not possible. The state union wouldn't permit it. Plus what if they had a job interview? Or were too exhausted from working at the state job? Did you really want a Power plant manager filling potholes?
It sounds nice, but the question is, who determines what is "unqualified"?
I suppose a Judge and/or Jury would decide.
Many laws are about a person's intent in conjunction with their actual actions. It would be up to the prosecution to prove intent to preserve benefits by just going through the motions in contrast to vigorously pursuing gainful employment.
You may recall the FBI relied on their assessment of Hillary Clinton's lack of intent regarding her email server as justification for not referring her to Justice for prosecution of her crimes of actually having the email server with classified and top secret information on it. Well, that and James Comey wanted to preserve his job under what he presumed would be a Hillary Clinton Presidential Administration.
Other laws are about strict liability - intent plays no role; if you did X, you broke the law. There is no possibility of mitigating factors.
Not possible. The state union wouldn't permit it. Plus what if they had a job interview? Or were too exhausted from working at the state job? Did you really want a Power plant manager filling potholes?
??? Employees people have managed to go to interviews despite working too
Besides that's why I said 2-3 days, so they have rest of week to job search/interview
And yes, if a plant manager is on UI, why is he above filling potholes?
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.
