U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-24-2010, 10:57 PM
 
162 posts, read 291,570 times
Reputation: 40

Advertisements

So what does it propose? Are they doing away with the EB permanent triggers?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:10 PM
 
162 posts, read 291,570 times
Reputation: 40
Actually could this be the real reason why Njdol is putting people in a holding pattern after they exhaust any euc tiers before moving them to eb?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:35 PM
 
24,497 posts, read 37,184,345 times
Reputation: 12873
IT has nothing to do with EUC or EB. It's a relatively minor bill... mostly good stuff to reduce tax burden.

1. Laid off worker will wait one additional week before receiving first UI check. The amount of weeks is NOT reduced. Just shifted back one week. (excellent taxsavings potential without reducing total amount)

2. (Removed from Bill) The benefit amount per week will be reduced by $50. (Done to reduce tax burden in #3)

3. Employers which were facing a tax increase of $480 per laid off person, will now only receive a tax increase of $137 due to the savings from #2. (Share the burden, I like this)

4. Those fired or let go for unacceptable or criminal behavior will NOT be allowed to collect UI.

5. Option to collect up to 52 weeks by participating in a shared work program. (proposed by republican party)

6. No reduction to your Weekly Benefit Rate if you are working part time and earning up to 100% of your Weekly Benefit Rate. Currently once you earn more than 20%, your WBR is reduced. (proposed by republican party)

7. This one I don't understand: "[The] initiative would allow layoffs to be "shared" among workers" (proposed by democrat party)

I should add that regarding #2, NJ pays the 3rd most in UI insurance AFTER the decrease. NY max benefit is $405, ours currently is $600.

Last edited by NJBest; 06-24-2010 at 11:55 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:38 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,613 posts, read 11,790,321 times
Reputation: 3105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlukas79 View Post
Actually could this be the real reason why Njdol is putting people in a holding pattern after they exhaust any euc tiers before moving them to eb?

It's because they (like a few other states) are running out of money to fund state EB, so they're hoping like he** the feds come to the party.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:39 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,613 posts, read 11,790,321 times
Reputation: 3105
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
IT has nothing to do with EUC or EB. It's a relatively minor bill... mostly good stuff to reduce tax burden.

1. Laid off worker will wait one additional week before receiving first UI check. The amount of weeks is NOT reduced. Just shifted back one week. (excellent taxsavings potential without reducing total amount)

2. The benefit amount per week will be reduced by $50. (Done to reduce tax burden in #3)

3. Employers which were facing a tax increase of $480 per laid off person, will now only receive a tax increase of $137 due to the savings from #2. (Share the burden, I like this)

4. Those fired or let go for unacceptable or criminal behavior will NOT be allowed to collect UI.

5. Option to collect up to 52 weeks by participating in a shared work program. (proposed by republican party)

6. No reduction to your Weekly Benefit Rate if you are working part time and earning up to 100% of your Weekly Benefit Rate. Currently once you earn more than 20%, your WBR is reduced. (proposed by republican party)

7. This one I don't understand: "[The] initiative would allow layoffs to be "shared" among workers" (proposed by democrat party)
Wouldn't #4 already be covered under "gross misconduct" ? Not sure about NJ, but I know in most states gross misconduct is a reason for denial.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:43 PM
 
24,497 posts, read 37,184,345 times
Reputation: 12873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
Wouldn't #4 already be covered under "gross misconduct" ? Not sure about NJ, but I know in most states gross misconduct is a reason for denial.

We have one too... but the bill is trying to toughen it. I haven't read the current laws or the actual text of this bill... so I don't really know the exact context.

These points were grabbed from NJ.com article.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:48 PM
 
162 posts, read 291,570 times
Reputation: 40
In the article it states no reduction in benefits. So the 50 dollar reduction was taken out
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:54 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,613 posts, read 11,790,321 times
Reputation: 3105
I was under the impression this bill already passed back in May withOUT Christie's new proposals. The NEW news is that he has now vetoed the bill as presented to him rather than sign it into law.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:56 PM
 
162 posts, read 291,570 times
Reputation: 40
In his original proposal; Christie wanted to eliminate the extended benefits provision unless it was funded 100% by the Feds.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 11:56 PM
 
24,497 posts, read 37,184,345 times
Reputation: 12873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlukas79 View Post
In the article it states no reduction in benefits. So the 50 dollar reduction was taken out
updated. thx
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:48 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top