Oregon Needs to Change the UI Law Here

The main reason I decided to join OSEA, the AFT-affiliated union for classified employees, was so that I would be eligible to apply for school district work in the summer months.

It would be great if I didn't have to do it at all, but the financial hardships are too much during that 10-week summer break.

Teachers are salaried, and they typically have their annual salaries spread out over 12 months. School-based classifieds have to somehow scrimp and save their meager salaries to carry them over during the unpaid period because they are paid by the hour.

OSEA is trying to get the unemployment insurance law changed so that classified employees, like construction workers and loggers, can get UI when they are not working for an extended period of time but have not been permanently laid off.

From the newsletter:

Classified employees testify for unemployment benefits during school breaks

OSEA members testified last week before the state Senate Workforce Committee in favor of removing restrictions that currently deny unemployment benefits to classified school employees when their workplace is temporarily closed.

Senate Bill 470 would ensure that our members are not unfairly prevented from receiving benefits that other workers whose workplaces periodically close — loggers and construction workers for example — are allowed to receive.

Beth Lampert, a special education assistant from Crook County Chapter 85, highlighted the real value her work brings to the lives of special needs children in the school — and the financial struggles she must endure in order to continue serving them.

Anna Taylor, a special education assistant from Beaverton Chapter 48, described the dilemma of how she will persevere when school is closed for the summer.

"Arriving at that Sept. 20 [pay day] was almost impossible," Taylor said of her experience last year. "August 1 is a terrible time to be looking for a second part-time job."

She said she had to seek arrangements with debtors and her landlord in order to avoid being sent to collections.

"It's taken months to recover from that financial setback," Taylor said.

OSEA Board of Directors Secretary Cydnie Meyer, a head secretary in Corvallis Chapter 2, pointed out the high classified employee turnover in her district — 70 percent of whom have a bachelor’s degree. Ensuring basic, year-round financial security could reduce turnover costs for the district and provide a more consistent educational experience for students.

"The high level of classified turnover causes a disconnect and a slowdown in student academic progress as our classified employees are replaced," Meyer said. "... As you are considering costs of this measure, I hope you are considering the hidden costs that are being paid daily by our classified members as a result of this unjust position."

The next step is a work session, where legislators may or may not decide to pass the bill onto the full Senate for a vote.

You can view video footage of the testimony here starting at minute 12:00. More than 30 other OSEA members provided supportive written testimony for the hearing, which can be found here.

Oregon is more sane than other states. I hope the legislature does this.

Another Reason I Will NEVER Vote for Obama

We really don't have two political parties. Now we have "Democrats" who are willing to slash UI benefits when in fact there is NO evidence at all there is an economic recovery, and in fact this will worsen it.

And then on top of this states can impose drug testing on UI applicants. Why not require EMPLOYERS to undergo these tests since they are the ones who lay people off so they can qualify for them.

If Obama is re-elected, he will be as bad or worse than the Republican because he IS one after all.

Obama and the Democrats are well aware that this move will drive millions more people into the already exploding ranks of the poor, homeless and malnourished. But, as the agreement demonstrates, they, like their Republican counterparts, serve the class interests not of the “middle class” or the “people,” but of a ruthless corporate-financial oligarchy.

They have rejected any measures to create jobs or provide serious relief for the unemployed not just because the ruling elite opposes any reduction of its wealth to meet social needs. The ruling class has a deliberate strategy to keep unemployment high and use economic insecurity and social misery as battering rams to destroy the wages and conditions of the working class.Obama personifies the cynicism and contempt of the ruling class for the broad mass of the people. He spoke Wednesday at a factory in Milwaukee, where he touted his policy of “in-sourcing” jobs from abroad. He omitted the fact that this is based on driving down the wages of US workers. “I’m glad to see that Congress seems to be on the way to making progress on extending the payroll tax cut… as soon as Congress sends the extension of this tax cut and unemployment insurance to my desk, I will sign it right away,” he said.

Some State Governors

are whining that because their states are in the financial crapper, they want to shaft the unemployed by cutting their already meager benefits.

Of course people can't move to another state to get bigger benefits; the UI law doesn't work that way. If I were to move to Oregon, for example, I still would draw from Nevada's UI because I worked in Nevada, not in Oregon. Oregon's UI benefits are more generous than Nevada's, but it doesn't matter when an unemployed out-of-stater like me moves there.

Personal Stuff and UI

It appears I will need to keep filling out and mailing the state extended benefits for Nevada, and then when that runs out in about six or seven weeks, I then am eligible for federal Tier III extended benefits, according to this link.

It appears in Oregon the federal supercedes the state extended benefits, but perhaps that state doesn't require a snail mail claim, either.

Nevada unfortunately does.

The state unemployment insurance agency, DETR, has been sending out notices to a few people the agency overpaid and therefore these people must repay the overpayments. I don't know how that can be done, frankly.

What's really bad is employers aren't even held to the 11-day limit to challenge a claim, apparently. This isn't right. If it's 11 days for the former employee to file an appeal, it should be 11 days for the employer to challenge a former employee's claim.

The union's executive director when I worked at WCSD flat-out LIED about my eligibility. I believed her bullshit that the district would "fight" any claim I would make and claim I committed "misconduct," even though there was no misconduct on my part but there sure as hell was misconduct on the part of that dumbass principal and the head of human resources. So I went FOUR months without filing a claim until the union lawyers suggested the day of my kangaroo hearing I file. Of course I got the benefits, as the person from DETR in Las Vegas said they get "these kind of claims all the time" after I sent them a copy of the union's lawyers' brief.

The Education Wars

Well, no shit, Sherlock. If a teacher is shitcanned or simply laid off, and he or she takes a "resignation" offered by the school district, he or she probably deserves what he or she got.

You NEVER, EVER, EVER resign from a school district if the district is planning to shitcan you. I wasn't given that option because the principal was a moron. I did, however, investigate the possibility of a settlement, and knew, after the district offered a pittance of $10,000, it would screw me out of unemployment compensation. Of course the union's executive director lied to me about my eligibility when I met with the union's attorney prior to asking about a settlement. She said the district would say I committed "misconduct" (WHAT fucking misconduct?) and they would "fight me." Well, I believed her shit for four months until the hearing, when the union lawyers thought I was crazy for not applying. Well, I did, and sent the state unemployment office a copy of the lawyers' opening brief, and they told me they get these kinds of cases "all the time." I was approved for UI after the district offered NO OBJECTION (they knew they wrongfully dismissed me anyway), and therefore I have received FAR more in UI than I would have in that settlement.

In fact, teachers, if offered to resign instead of terminated, should reject the idea out of hand. As the poster in the piece says, district applications (and state licensing boards) will ask if a teacher has have ever resigned in lieu of a dismissal, so there is no career benefit in taking a resignation. It's actually worse if a teacher resigns, for it signifies the teacher committed some sort of "misconduct." When a principal offers a teacher a resignation in lieu of a dismissal, it is all about the district wanting to screw a teacher out of unemployment benefits and save money. School districts should be legally barred from doing this. I believe California and Oregon, for example, actually bar districts from doing that.

What is Wrong

with the current unemployment compensation system?

Shifts in employment patterns and a tightening of eligibility requirements are behind the nationwide reduction in effective unemployment insurance coverage. Today almost 30% of the U.S. work force is employed in nonstandard work arrangements, including part-time, temporary, contract or on-call work, and self-employment. Most of these jobs are subject to the payroll tax that funds unemployment benefits—yet these workers often find they are ineligible. For instance, persons who are seeking only part-time employment do not qualify for unemployment benefits in many states. This affects women in particular, including heads of households, who often work part time due to dependent care responsibilities. People who work full time but only for part of the year may also find it difficult to qualify for unemployment benefits.

Many workers who are not eligible for benefits provide income that is critical to their families. In 2007, 41% of workers worked only part-time or part-year. Among heads of households, this figure, though lower, was still sizeable: in 2007, it was 32% overall and 42% for female family heads. Besides child care, elder care can also mean part-time or part-year work for many. Nearly one-third of working adults with older parents report missing some work to care for them.

While Congress Worries

about things that really aren't dire, millions of the unemployed are scared to death because there are NO jobs to be had, and the more menial the work, the more fierce the competition.

Even in fields like health care and education (the latter especially a crappy endeavor as districts all over the country are throwing unwanted teachers out in order to exploit the worsening economy of having hundreds of applicants for one or two jobs--with those jobs more often than not filled with nepotisms), it is very difficult for people to be hired.

And what about temporary work? There's none of that, since employers aren't hiring anybody, whether permanent, temporary, or using temp services. And they aren't hiring because many of the jobs have been outsourced to cheapo third world countries or else they aren't hiring because nobody is buying anything. And when nobody is buying anything, there can't be any jobs created.

But Obama has more important things to do than worry about job creation, which requires federal help to jumpstart the economy.

This person is one of millions:

In Milwaukee, Debbie Kransky has been without work since February, when she was laid off from a medical billing position — her second job loss in two years. She has exhausted her unemployment benefits, because her last job lasted for only a month.

Indeed, in a perverse quirk of the unemployment system, she would have qualified for continued benefits had she stayed jobless the whole two years, rather than taking a new position this year. But since her latest unemployment claim stemmed from a job that lasted mere weeks, she recently drew her final check of $340.

Ms. Kransky, 51, has run through her life savings of roughly $10,000. Her job search has garnered little besides anxiety.

“I’ve worked my entire life,” said Ms. Kransky, who lives alone in a one-bedroom apartment. “I’ve got October rent. After that, I don’t know. I’ve never lived month to month my entire life. I’m just so scared, I can’t even put it into words.”

I can. It's the shits, and I blame our elected officials for selling our country down the river.

Congress Should Extend

UI compensation to the end of next year at the very least since there are few or no jobs to be had.

As I have said, the more menial the work, the more applicants for the job. In my case it is ridiculous to retrain at nearly 55 years of age, though I am looking at the possibility of online courses, but I don't want a goddamned degree after having gone to college 15 years and having attained a master's.

Extending unemployment benefits is critical because the jobless can't find new positions in this recession, experts said. A record 50.7% of the unemployed fail to find work within six months of receiving benefits, according to the National Employment Law Project. There are now more than six potential workers for each opening, up from 1.7 in December 2007.

In most states, the unemployed receive 26 weeks of state-funded benefits. Depending on where they live, they could get federally funded extensions for a total of 79 weeks.

Governors of 22 states appealed to Congressional leaders this week to quickly pass extended benefits.

"Employment lags behind economic recovery, and we cannot forget that help for unemployed workers and their families remains a critical need," said Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, which has the highest jobless rate in the country.

Any Republican who would vote against it is a cruel, selfish s.o.b., pure and simple.

Yes,

Congress is working on extended UI benefits. Whether the final legislation will be 13 weeks or until 2011 is the question.

Leave it to dumbasses like Jim Bunning who try and pin the unemployed as not having the "right" skills for today's economy.

They have the skills, stupid, but there aren't the jobs except for the most menial. And because what is left happens to be the most menial, unskilled jobs, those jobs get hundreds of applicants, thus driving the wages down even lower.

Which is why Republicans despise UI. People who get it aren't as desperate.

I hate the GOP for that reason alone. They don't care about people at all.

While Our Politicians are Haggling Over

health care "reform," thousands of people are in danger of exhausting all of their unemployment benefits.

With the money that was spent giving handouts to the banks and other crooks who created the economic mess, you'd think the feds would start creating jobs for displaced workers ala FDR.

Not a chance with the GOP and the "blue dogs" and neoliberals running things.

Miscellaneous Yakking [Updated]

I have discovered over the years one doesn't have to be particularly bright or talented to write books or have ghostwritten books written on his or her behalf; for example, take a look at books "written" by Ann Coulter or Glenn Beck for proof.

The so-called "left" has its own purveyors of pretentious prose, as anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has a new "book" available only as a download.

She's supposed to be in Ashland tonight to promote her masterpiece. I doubt I am going to waste my time driving clear over there. I will see how I feel.
_____

What happens when a group of billionaires get together to talk about giving away money?

What they SHOULD be talking about is giving their share of what they SHOULD have been paying in taxes all along to the federal government; we wouldn't be in this goddamned mess to begin with if they had.

Well, that and not sending all of our jobs overseas.
_____

Not under "yakking," but the total number of people receiving UI is still at record levels, which means employers still aren't hiring.
_____

So is the decision of the Obama administration to oppose the reinstatement of Valerie Plame's case based on law or is it based on revenge since Plame and husband Joseph Wilson backed Hillary Clinton in last year's primaries?
_____

Jimbo Eruptions

The Nevada state assembly unanimously approved the federal stimulus aid to the unemployed.

With both state and federal UI, benefits can run up to 79 weeks. Yours truly should be "good" up through February of next year.

Jimbo Eruptions

Realizing unemployed people also vote, Jimbo has decided to take the stimulus money after all:

Gibbons made his announcement after the Assembly Ways and Means Committee voted unanimously Monday for measures that allow lawmakers to accept the stimulus funds for the jobless benefits.

Most of the money will be used to extend the number of weeks that those already on the jobless rolls can get unemployment checks. There's also $77 million more to pay for additional people, and Gibbons said the expanded coverage was what concerned him.

By accepting the money, the state would have to change its qualification rules for unemployment claims.

Jimbo Eruptions

I hope the Nevada legislature will bypass the idiot governor and approve the stimulus plan's extension of UI.

Another Reason I Can't Stand the Republican Party

In California the GOP is rejecting the extension of UI, and the economic situation there is truly dire.

These bastards are playing politics, just as our idiot governor in Nevada and other Republican governors in other states. They fucking hate people who aren't rich.

They bitch about unemployment insurance, which will stimulate the economy, yet they love to bail out the robber barons for creating this mess. They make me sick.

Dumbass GOP Governors

want to keep fucking over the unemployed because they think the unemployed won't fight back, but I think they are going to find out they can.

Not only that, but the stimulus package isn't a cafeteria deal.

It's Too Bad, So Sad for

those GOP governors who think they can pick and choose what items in the stimulus package they will take; in fact, they can't do it.

Senator Schumer reminds these politically-motivated dipshits:

February 24, 2009

Dear Director Orszag:

In recent days, a small minority of governors, mostly Republicans, have publicly weighed the possibility of foregoing certain emergency provisions provided under the American Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act signed last week by President Obama. I believe this prospect not only would undercut the stimulative effect of the recovery package, but also is inconsistent with a key provision included in the law passed by Congress. To protect the integrity of the recovery program, I urge the administration to issue implementation guidance clarifying that while any Governor may exercise his or her discretion to accept or reject the federal funds provided in the stimulus, no Governor should have the authority to arbitrarily adopt a select subset of the overall package.

As you know, Section 1607(a) of the economic recovery legislation provides that the Governor of each state must certify a request for stimulus funds before any money can flow. No language in this provision, however, permits the governor to selectively adopt some components of the bill while rejecting others. To allow such picking and choosing would, in effect, empower the governors with a line-item veto authority that President Obama himself did not possess at the time he signed the legislation. It would also undermine the overall success of the bill, as the components most singled out for criticism by these governors are among the most productive measures in terms of stimulating the economy.

For instance, at least two governors have proposed rejecting a program to expand unemployment insurance for laid-off workers. Economists consistently rank unemployment insurance among the most efficient and cost-effective fiscal stimulus measures; by one frequently cited estimate, it provides an economic return of as high as $1.73 for every dollar invested. Thus, by denying this provision for their residents, these governors are not just depriving some of the neediest Americans of relief in a dire economy; they are undermining the overall stimulative impact of the package.

No one would dispute that these governors should be given the choice as to whether to accept the funds or not. But it should not be multiple choice. The composition of the package was rightly dictated by economic considerations; we should not let the implementation of the package be dictated by political considerations.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Schumer
United States Senator

Far too many Republican politicians DESPISE UI because they want the wage base to further be pulled down, and if people on UI are more selective about what they take for employment, employers will be less inclined to pay rockbottom pay.

The Booming Economy

Jobless benefit rolls have hit an all-time high:

The Labor Department reported that, for the second week in a row, more than 600,000 US workers filed new claims for unemployment benefits last week, bringing the total number of continuing claims—those drawn by workers collecting benefits for more than one week—to a record high of 4,810,000. Continuing claims have risen by more than 2 million over the past year, reaching the highest level since the government began keeping track in 1967.

Initial claims for jobless benefits totaled 623,000, slightly less than the upwardly revised figure of 631,000 for the previous week. The latest weekly figure was significantly higher than analysts’ expectations of 610,000 claims. New jobless claims have nearly doubled from a year ago.

The four-week average of claims jumped 24,000 to 607,500, the highest total since November 1982, when the US was in its most severe recession since the 1930s.

An additional 1.5 million people are receiving benefits under an extended unemployment compensation program approved by Congress last year, bringing the total number of jobless pay recipients to 6.3 million.

_____

It's a vicious circle: Before you can get many jobs, especially those in the finance industry, they require a credit check, and of course if you have had financial problems, your credit is down the tubes. But if you want to get out of debt, you need a job, and yet employers can deny you the right to be employed and get out of it.

It's truly sick and twisted, just like questions asking whether or not you have ever been fired from a job, but in the latter case, applicants do not have to disclose it and there is no way for employers to find out without the previous employer risking a major civil rights/wrong termination lawsuit. But with credit checks, it's very easy for employers to do.

The real reason they do these checks is simply to screen applicants out. It has NOTHING to do with "security."

It should be made illegal for companies to do credit checks; it is supposedly illegal to discriminate against workers because they have filed for bankruptcy. The law needs to be expanded to ban credit checks.
_____

For the Curious,

just what is life like for the newly unemployed?

It's no picnic, let me tell you.

WHY TAX THE UNEMPLOYED?

I've been out of work for six months. My unemployment benefits, now reaching the final days of their last twelve-week extension, barely cover my basic monthly living expenses. While I am most grateful to receive them, I don't understand why the government taxes unemployment benefits. I'm facing a tax bill against benefits received in 2008 and I have no idea how I'm going to pay it. Worrying about this--on top of worrying about what I'll do if I become sick (since I have no health insurance), on top of searching for a job everyday--is almost too much. Thank you for providing a forum for the people most in need of economic help to have their voices heard.

Blame the GOP for that. It used to be UI wasn't taxed; I believe the move to tax benefits was during the Reagan years, because there is this mentality among too many in the GOP that people who are on UI are a bunch of bums. Never mind it is an insurance program for people who find themselves out of a job, whether through layoff or termination.

Obama's stimulus plan might be too slow.

The situation is truly dire.

More Booming Economy

Reno is discovering more people are going hungry and need the help of food banks and places like St. Vincent's to survive, or special events like free Thanksgiving dinners put on by local businesses and churches.

Incredible, isn't it, when Nevada was once considered recession proof.

Reed said she hopes to find a job in a casino, but someone stole her identification cards and she is waiting for new ones.
Johnson said he worked as a day laborer until August, when temp jobs began to dry up.

“There’s no work right now,” he said. “Even if you can find something, you need a car and I don’t have a car. So we’re just trying to survive.”

That's my problem right now, even though I am applying for jobs because I have to in order to continue to get UI, despite the fact I am still technically employed but have no income from there as yet. But it's impossible without a car, absolutely and totally impossible when all of the jobs, what few there are, happen to be clear out on the edge of town and require a long commute. It's not practical to take the buses when the jobs are so far out.

Our dictator proved he is a compassionate conservative by signing into law extension of jobless benefits. Mine run out in mid-February. I don't expect the hearing officer's decision to come down before then.