Showing posts with label unemployment insurance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unemployment insurance. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Unemployment Benefits Benefit Everyone

FLORIDA FORUM

By Emily Eisenhauer

Several bills before the Florida Legislature seek to make it harder for those who are out of work through no fault of their own to get unemployment compensation. Community service requirements, mandatory drug testing, and limiting the number of weeks all seem to be based on the idea that people who are getting benefits don’t deserve them or are not looking hard enough for a job. But in this economy, that doesn’t make sense, and these proposals will make it harder for the system to do its job.

Florida lost almost a million jobs in the recession that began in late 2007, and over 1.1. million people remain unemployed in the state. Last year, 2010, was better, in that the state added 43,500 jobs. But that just means for every job added, there were still 25 people looking for work. Right now almost half of the people out of work have been looking for a job for over 6 months, and over one-third have been looking for more than a year. In recent weeks the media have covered many stories of people who have been applying for any job they can find, and still coming up empty.

Florida already has one of the strictest unemployment compensation systems in the country. In any given week between 15 and 20% of people who submit claims are rejected by the state for not providing sufficient proof of work search or other eligibility reasons. Florida has the fourth lowest maximum weekly benefit in the country - $275 – with an average weekly payment of $230. That means that on average unemployment benefits replace about 38% of a worker’s previous salary. It’s hard to imagine that people surviving on 38% of their salary wouldn’t be out doing everything they can to get a new job.

Unemployment compensation exists for two reasons: 1) to provide support for people who are out of work through no fault of their own, and 2) to stabilize the economy during a downturn. UC functions like an insurance program, and in fact in other states it is referred to as unemployment insurance (UI). Money is paid by employers for each of their employees into a fund so that should a worker lose a job there’s a cushion until he or she finds another. It isn’t welfare, it is money that workers have already earned. Applicants must show they have worked a certain amount in order to draw benefits, and the amount of benefits anyone can is capped.

This insurance program not only benefits laid-off workers, it benefits the whole economy. When thousands lose their jobs within a short time period businesses get hurt too because demand for goods and services declines. UC replaces some of the money that otherwise would have been lost to the economy and puts it into the pockets of people who will immediately spend it on basic necessities. As for the numbers: The

Congressional Budget Office estimated that extending UI benefits would bring a return of investment of as much as $1.90 in increased gross domestic product for every dollar spent, compared with extending the Bush era tax cuts, which brings a return of only 40 cents on the dollar.

This is why it makes so much sense to make sure that everyone who has earned benefits is getting them. Even before the recession the system wasn’t perfect and many people who had earned enough to qualify were excluded because Florida still uses a pre-computer-era system for deciding eligibility. This unfairly denies benefits to many workers because it doesn’t count their last six months on the job, and it hits low-wage and seasonal workers especially hard.

Florida also has refused to modernize eligibility rules to provide insurance for workers who are victims of domestic violence or have to leave work to care for a sick family member. Thirty-two other states allow these workers to qualify.

For these reasons and others, Florida has one of the lowest recipiency rates in the country. A 2004 study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research and the National Employment Law Project found that only 33 percent of unemployed workers in Florida were receiving unemployment benefits, compared with the national average of 44 percent. Some states, like Connecticut, had rates exceeding 80 percent.

If Florida modernized its system tens of thousands more workers would be able to get the benefits they have earned, and the whole state would reap the economic benefit. Not to mention the $444 million that Florida could receive under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act if it made these changes, and which would more than pay for the additional benefits.

Instead of making the unemployment compensation system even more difficult for workers, now is the time when we should be making sure that everyone who is eligible is participating. Unemployment benefits keep the economy moving, which is exactly what we need right now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eisenhauer is a research associate at the Research Institute for Social and Economic Policy at the Center for Labor Research and Studies at Florida International University.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the Florida Forum. 3/11

TEXAS LONE STAR FORUM

By F. Scott McCown

Congress is now considering two important issues: whether to extend the Bush tax cuts and whether to extend the federally funded Unemployment Insurance program. To extend any part of the Bush tax cuts, particularly the high-end cuts, while cutting off Unemployment Insurance would betray hardworking Texans.

When a breadwinner loses a job through no fault of their own, they and their family are protected by Unemployment Insurance -- a federal-state program paid for by employers. The regular state program provides 26 weeks of benefits. Responding to the recession, Congress provided federal funding for an additional 67 weeks. But federal funding is running out, and if Congress fails to act by November 30, nearly 128,000 unemployed Texans will not get all or part of the additional weeks.

Both the public and history support extending Unemployment Insurance. A recent national survey shows 67 percent of the public are in favor of continuing Unemployment Insurance until the unemployment rate drops. And Congress has never allowed federally funded extensions to lapse when unemployment was over 7.2 percent. With the national unemployment rate well above 9 percent for 18 consecutive months, it’s far too soon for Congress to cut off Unemployment Insurance.

With the unemployment rate in Texas above eight percent for 14 consecutive months, Texas needs help as much as any state. Texas has almost 125,000 fewer available jobs than when the recession began in December 2007.

On top of everything else, if Congress cuts off federal Unemployment Insurance before it creates a sufficient number of jobs, Texas will face increased enrollment in our public assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Medicaid. Texas will be hard-pressed to cover its share of these increased costs because of our state revenue crisis.

Even though the case for Congress extending Unemployment Insurance is clear, two sticking points have emerged. Some argue that the unemployed need tough love to force them back to work by cutting off this “government handout.” But it’s way too soon for tough love.












The country has one job for every five people seeking work. And not every job seeker fits every job. Employers can be picky -- free to reject both the under- and over-qualified worker. Unemployment Insurance keeps the unemployed in the hunt, giving the economy time to create new jobs and workers time to get new skills.

Unemployment Insurance plays an important role in helping the economy maintain and create jobs. Unemployment Insurance allows Texas families to continue to pay their bills. For every dollar spent on benefits, approximately $2 is generated in spending. This spending supports Texas businesses, averting additional job losses and creating more jobs. Federal unemployment insurance programs have injected $5.8 billion into the Texas economy and have added an estimated $11.6 billion to our state’s Gross Domestic Product.

Nevertheless, some argue that Congress should not continue providing the additional weeks of Unemployment Insurance without spending cuts in some other part of the budget. But extending Unemployment Insurance would have virtually no effect on our long-term national debt because it’s temporary, and requiring off-setting spending cuts would actually be counterproductive because it would take money out of the economy.

Unemployment Insurance is far more important to our economic recovery than extending the high-end Bush tax cuts. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that federal Unemployment Insurance rates the highest in boosting the economy and creating jobs, while extending the high-end tax cuts rates the lowest.

Congress should provide an extension for a full year. Anything less is too little. And Congress should act now -- before the November 30 expiration of current benefits. Providing retroactive benefits in December is too late. Children can’t be fed retroactively. Congress needs to act to protect hardworking American families.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McCown is executive director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Texas Lone Star Forum. 11/10

COLORADO EDITORIAL FORUM

By Rich Jones

Would you share your hours with co-workers to avoid layoffs?

It’s a relevant question since Gov. Bill Ritter recently signed a work-share bill into law. Since the law is new, there are a lot of questions about what it means for Colorado workers. We'd like to provide some answers.

Work-share is a voluntary program that companies can use to weather short-term business declines.

Under the program, employers can reduce the hours of a work force to avoid layoffs. Employees, in turn, can claim unemployment benefits for the reduction in work hours.

Seventeen states have such programs and employers have reported these benefits: Sharing of reduced hours is less disruptive than layoffs; quality, skilled employees are retained; employee morale and productivity are sustained; and the cost of recruitment and training costs, once the economy improves, are reduced.

Because employees continue to receive their existing health and retirement benefits, there is less need to turn to state services for support. Also, the state sees savings in job assistance programs when more workers remain on the job.

In many states, these programs are considered pro-business initiatives. Businesses will opt in only if it makes business sense, and experience in other states has shown that work-share programs allow companies to lower costs during economic downturns and still keep skilled workers.

The cost to participating businesses, in terms of payments to the unemployment insurance fund, is the same as if they laid off workers.

Under Colorado's new law, employers must submit a work-share plan to the Department of Labor and Employment; and they must certify that the plan and the reduction in hours are in lieu of temporary layoffs.

Plans must apply to at least 10 percent of employees, and work hours must be reduced by at least 10 percent and not more than 40 percent. Finally, employers must state their strategy for restoring work hours for participating employees.

Plans could last a maximum of 18 weeks, as opposed to 26 weeks for regular unemployment benefits. The entire work-share program is, in essence, tied to the current economic downturn; it will sunset in two years.

At the state level, work-share programs are seen as effective because, quite simply, they keep more people working. Consumer spending does not dip as it does when workers are laid off, and that is a benefit to the overall economy.

In 2009, 2,800 businesses with about 51,000 employees participated in Washington State’s "shared work" program.

That's a dramatic increase from 621 employers and 21,272 employees in 2008, and is attributable to the declining economy.

Washington paid out $40 million in unemployment benefits under the shared-work program in 2009, a savings of $54 million over what workers would have received if they had collected the state-average 17 weeks of traditional unemployment benefits, according to Washington's Employment Security Division.

The analysis of Colorado's work-share bill by the nonpartisan Legislative Council estimated that it would save as much as $2 million per year in unemployment insurance payments and require no additional employees to implement.

"Shared Work helps us maintain our competitive advantage," said Terry Schweyen, owner of ASAP Metal Fabricators in Yakima, WA. "It lets us keep our key people – a lot of trained people who have skill sets we need – until things pick up."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jones is director of policy and research at the Bell Policy Center, a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy and research organization based in Denver.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by Colorado Editorial Forum. 7/10