[Reilly1017]

[url]https://www.wfsb.com/news/back-to-work-ct-state-offering-1-000-for-unemployed-who-find-jobs/article_e257057e-b752-11eb-baeb-e38d6c65d940.html?block_id=994091[/url]

It comes from Cares Act money so no harm on the state budget but what I don’t get is it’s for people that find a full time job. Most service jobs (restaurants in particular) are not full time. The reason people are staying home instead of working 25 hours a week is because unemployment is more. However if someone can get a full time job with benefits, I doubt the extra $300 is a huge deal in causing you to not want a job with 40 hours and benefits

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by Reilly1017

https://www.wfsb.com/news/back-to-wo...lock_id=994091

It comes from Cares Act money so no harm on the state budget but what I don’t get is it’s for people that find a full time job. Most service jobs (restaurants in particular) are not full time. The reason people are staying home instead of working 25 hours a week is because unemployment is more. However if someone can get a full time job with benefits, I doubt the extra $300 is a huge deal in causing you to not want a job with 40 hours and benefits

You're right that the encouragement and incentive should be for finding part time jobs too, especially since ending the extended unemployment early at this point would be like cutting Social Security.

Much as I couldn't stand them in so many ways, Steve Mnuchin and the Trump Administration actually proposed something like this, I believe the idea would be to give you a one time $1200 payment if you went off unemployment for something that was at least 15 hours a week.

[beer belly]

This, IMO, is BS. Why should those who are capable of working, be bribed to go back to work. I say cut the unemployment boost, and get back to work. My Wife could of been on the plus side if she wanted to stay home and collect the extra $$, but work ehtic brought her back to her job.

[Stepfordct]

Once again Govt at it's finest. Stay home and wait to get paid is a good idea.
It's a bad idea so we will bribe you to get a job.

There's no shades of grey!
Listen how about we stop paying you to not work, you then go to work and wait for it....
You get a paycheck!

Meanwhile everyone is paying the inflation tax.

[Stylo]

I guess I can’t blame the state if it needs to spend the CARES money, but wow this is backwards and sets a poor precedent.

I always thought the second round of stimulus was a huge waste, as most of the country was already getting back to normal business for the most part. Concentrated aid for industries like restaurants, live entertainment, etc would’ve been appropriate.

While I do think the national minimum wage needs to be raised, I see a lot of excuses for those collecting and not going back to work as if it’s someone’s responsibility to pay them more for a little to no skill job, or else they should just collect. Questionable ethics and the entitlement attitude is growing.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Reilly1017

https://www.wfsb.com/news/back-to-wo...lock_id=994091

It comes from Cares Act money so no harm on the state budget but what I don’t get is it’s for people that find a full time job. Most service jobs (restaurants in particular) are not full time. The reason people are staying home instead of working 25 hours a week is because unemployment is more. However if someone can get a full time job with benefits, I doubt the extra $300 is a huge deal in causing you to not want a job with 40 hours and benefits

You have a very good point. It does seem pointless to do this. Jay

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by Stylo

I guess I can’t blame the state if it needs to spend the CARES money, but wow this is backwards and sets a poor precedent.

I always thought the second round of stimulus was a huge waste, as most of the country was already getting back to normal business for the most part. Concentrated aid for industries like restaurants, live entertainment, etc would’ve been appropriate.

While I do think the national minimum wage needs to be raised, I see a lot of excuses for those collecting and not going back to work as if it’s someone’s responsibility to pay them more for a little to no skill job, or else they should just collect. Questionable ethics and the entitlement attitude is growing.

I agree in full, and I do not question their non existent work ethic. This nation was stupid enough to pay them to be "on the dole". Requirements of seeking work being ignored or eliminated-should NEVER have occurred, and I would hope, employers do hold being out too long against them, as they should. Hire those who worked as much as they possible could over the last 14 months. Hire the currently employed first. You know their work ethic is solid.

[Cambium]

The extra $300 basically pays for health insurance. Once that's cut off people can't afford health insurance because the unemployment $$ is less than what they were making as is. Plus take taxes out of that. So technically they aren't making "more" than working full time. The incentive to go back to work is good but it comes down to what's available anyway.

Also, not many want to wear a mask for 4-8hrs straight

[Reilly1017]

Originally Posted by Cambium

The extra $300 basically pays for health insurance. Once that's cut off people can't afford health insurance because the unemployment $$ is less than what they were making as is. Plus take taxes out of that. So technically they aren't making "more" than working full time. The incentive to go back to work is good but it comes down to what's available anyway.

Also, not many want to wear a mask for 4-8hrs straight

Let’s say unemployment is $300/week from the state, add the kicker so $600 total. If my options are 25 hour part time job at Dunkin Donuts working variable hours making $12.50/hr or getting unemployment the unemployment is clearly better. ($325 per week vs $600 per week). I also wouldn’t say, like some in this thread, it’s about work ethic. Working a part time low wage job is a necessity for money it’s not to fulfill some huge emotional need or to show how good a worker you are. If someone is making more unemployed, spending more time with their kids in a positive way and maybe even doing something for them self (learn a skill, trade, hobby) I wouldn’t assume they have bad work ethic because they stay home. Would you go work at Dunkin Donuts for $325 when you could make $600, I wouldn’t, that’s stupid.

As stated above and I said it at the beginning, a full time job with benefits still trumps the unemployment boost. But I’m not going to crap on a single parent trying to navigate daycare, remote learning when they may also be financially and emotionally better off staying unemployed for a little while longer.

Let’s not forget the workforce also did shrink according to CDC numbers, you can argue cause of death all you want, reality is 2020 deaths were up 18-20% over 2019. That’s a few couple hundred thousand people right there that cannot go back to work.

[BobNJ1960]

Looking forward to September when the $300 ends, and logic returns to decision-making. This $1,000 bribe is simply the latest stupid decision the government made since covid began. We did not overreact with free gifts for the unemployed when the Great Recession struck. People took the corrective actions needed, rebuilding new careers when needed.

This time, we overreacted, and created labor market problems.