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 02-25-2010, 01:39 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 11,173,615 times
Reputation: 943

Advertisements

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is proposing major changes to the state’s unemployment system to take effect in July 2010.

Those changes include reducing tax increases on businesses, establishing a one-week waiting period for people receiving benefits, reducing the maximum weekly benefits check by $50, and increasing benefit restrictions on people fired for "misconduct."

The changes would not affect those already collecting New Jersey unemployment.

Gov. Chris Christie is expected to propose changes to N.J. unemployment system | - NJ.com
Christie to scale back NJ unemployment benefits
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2010, 03:35 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
478 posts, read 1,593,238 times
Reputation: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by diorgirl View Post
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is proposing major changes to the state’s unemployment system to take effect in July 2010.

Those changes include reducing tax increases on businesses, establishing a one-week waiting period for people receiving benefits, reducing the maximum weekly benefits check by $50, and increasing benefit restrictions on people fired for "misconduct."

The changes would not affect those already collecting New Jersey unemployment.

Gov. Chris Christie is expected to propose changes to N.J. unemployment system | - NJ.com
Christie to scale back NJ unemployment benefits
Well I didn't vote for him..but seems he is cutting down on quite a few things to get the budget lower.

Hitting the unemployed is a bad idea they are suffering enough..but its not that harsh and doesn't startup till July ( a fair warning whats to come).

Minus $50 to have Max at $550 is still way higher then other states..those fired without a great reason should never get benefits and the one week waiting period is common in most states now.

Could be worst..he can stop the states share of EB (take away the TUR trigger if passed in the state congress) after the Feds end 100% paid..then no EB for anyone unless a very high IUR trigger.

Last edited by carlo2009; 02-25-2010 at 03:44 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 01:46 AM
 
259 posts, read 621,113 times
Reputation: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlo2009 View Post
Well I didn't vote for him..but seems he is cutting down on quite a few things to get the budget lower.

Hitting the unemployed is a bad idea they are suffering enough..but its not that harsh and doesn't startup till July ( a fair warning whats to come).

Minus $50 to have Max at $550 is still way higher then other states..those fired without a great reason should never get benefits and the one week waiting period is common in most states now.

Could be worst..he can stop the states share of EB (take away the TUR trigger if passed in the state congress) after the Feds end 100% paid..then no EB for anyone unless a very high IUR trigger.


Thats exactly what else he proposed too..................... read the article. He wants to cut EB when not funded 100% by the feds
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 01:52 AM
 
259 posts, read 621,113 times
Reputation: 56
Christie would make the "extended benefit" provision dependent on the continuation of 100 percent federal funding of benefit costs. He said this is a provision that has been adopted in 21 other states, including three neighboring states and would result in $1.6 billion in savings.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 02:25 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 11,173,615 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubz View Post
Christie would make the "extended benefit" provision dependent on the continuation of 100 percent federal funding of benefit costs. He said this is a provision that has been adopted in 21 other states, including three neighboring states and would result in $1.6 billion in savings.
It is true that 21 other states will no longer provide EB unless it is funded 100% by the federal government. However, in order to do that in NJ -- and to realize several other of his proposals -- Christie requires passage of those changes by the state legislature.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 12:44 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 11,173,615 times
Reputation: 943
Default Background on Christie's UI Proposals

Background on Christie's proposed changes in New Jersey's UI system:
New Jersey's Unemployment Insurance fund (UI) ran out of cash in March 2009, forcing the state to borrow $1.2 billion from the federal government to pay unemployment claims.

Twenty-eight states have insolvent unemployment insurance funds and are now receiving federal loans. It is anticipated that 40 states will be receiving such federal loans by the end of 2010.

Under New Jersey law, business payroll withholding for UI automatically increases once the fund goes below a certain level. On July 1, 2010, NJ employers would have incurred an average per-employee hike of $400 – a 52 percent increase – with some employers seeing an increase of up to $683 per employee.

According to Christie, “While we are legally obligated to replenish the fund, we will do so in a way that does not force employers to lay off more employees, reduce worker hours, salary or benefits and increase business costs. Those are the consequences of higher unemployment taxes on business.”

New Jersey Focuses On Insolvent Unemployment Insurance Fund | Gov Monitor (http://thegovmonitor.com/world_news/united_states/new-jersey-focuses-on-insolvent-unemployment-insurance-fund-24840.html - broken link)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 02:11 PM
 
Location: Westchester County, NY
9,757 posts, read 15,794,013 times
Reputation: 3918
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlo2009 View Post
Well I didn't vote for him..but seems he is cutting down on quite a few things to get the budget lower.

Hitting the unemployed is a bad idea they are suffering enough..but its not that harsh and doesn't startup till July ( a fair warning whats to come).

Minus $50 to have Max at $550 is still way higher then other states..those fired without a great reason should never get benefits and the one week waiting period is common in most states now.

Could be worst..he can stop the states share of EB (take away the TUR trigger if passed in the state congress) after the Feds end 100% paid..then no EB for anyone unless a very high IUR trigger.
I read the article too and didn't understand a few things:

1) Dropping the $600 max to $550 --> The $600 was the highest in the country (neighboring NY only maxes at $405), but didn't they just raise it to that from $500? Maybe they shouldn't have raised it then to begin with.

2) They didn't have a 1 week waiting period? Wow I thought that was a Federal thing, I guess not, it's just a NY thing. Why is there a waiting period to begin with? And how does that save money for the state, it just puts off the payment a week?

3) And you COLLECTED unemployment if you weren't fired through no fault of your own in NJ? Again, I thought that was true of UI in general (you don't get it if you were fired for misconduct), I'm surprised people don't go live in NJ en masse then
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 02:42 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 11,173,615 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7 Wishes View Post
I read the article too and didn't understand a few things:

1) Dropping the $600 max to $550 --> The $600 was the highest in the country (neighboring NY only maxes at $405), but didn't they just raise it to that from $500? Maybe they shouldn't have raised it then to begin with.

2) They didn't have a 1 week waiting period? Wow I thought that was a Federal thing, I guess not, it's just a NY thing. Why is there a waiting period to begin with? And how does that save money for the state, it just puts off the payment a week?

3) And you COLLECTED unemployment if you weren't fired through no fault of your own in NJ? Again, I thought that was true of UI in general (you don't get it if you were fired for misconduct), I'm surprised people don't go live in NJ en masse then
(1) The weekly maximum benefit was raised under a previous administration in NJ. Obviously, Christie believes it should not have been raised.

(2) There is no one week waiting period in NJ. Your claim is active on the start of the next employment week (Sunday) after you file your claim. Example: you file a claim on Tuesday; your unemployment week starts on the subsequent Sunday. Since your state (NY) does have a one week waiting period, you might check with them why it exists there.

(3) In New Jersey, you are denied UI benefits if you were terminated for "gross misconduct." If you were terminated for "misconduct" there is a penalty of a waiting period of several weeks before you can start collecting.

As I have written in many posts, the administration of UI benefits can vary greatly from state to state -- which is why it is important to check your state's DOL website or call your local UI office to learn the details of how UI is administered in your state.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 03:22 PM
 
129 posts, read 503,931 times
Reputation: 90
Back in January, Pennsylvania enacted their weekly benefit reduction plan under their state unemployment laws. By law, if Pennsylvania's unemployment trust fund gets down to a certain dollar level, the state kicks in the reduction in weekly benefit amounts. The amount of reduction is 2.3%. It comes out to $2.30 per $100 of weekly benefit. Also, PA started taxing the weekly $25 FAC payments by federal tax rates for unemployment (10%). This means instead of a $50 check every 2 weeks, it is now a $44 check every 2 weeks.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 03:31 PM
 
154 posts, read 447,516 times
Reputation: 306
In answer to item 1)-in 2009 the highest NJ state UI benefit you could collect was $584/week. And I believe the Massachusetts maximum benefit is higher than N.J's. or at least it was in 2009. It does seem to me that NY's max.of $405 is pretty low if you happen to live in NYC or one of its nearby suburbs. I guess I should be glad to be unemployed in NJ instead of NY.
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 07:14 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