Coronavirus (political)

[MTK]

It's easy to say people are just being lazy, but it's just not realistic to think someone is going to say yeah I want to return to work for $500 a week vs staying home for $900.

[SolidSnake84]

Originally Posted by MTK

It's easy to say people are just being lazy, but it's just not realistic to think someone is going to say yeah I want to return to work for $500 a week vs staying home for $900.

I think what it will come down to is the unemployment benefits being tied to being "active and able for work".

I would think at some point the state(s) are figuring out what is going on and is making sure to change / enforce the language to stipulate that you must be willing to work to continue your benefits.

So, if your job calls you and says they are opening back up but you say no thanks, that should end your unemployment right there at the moment that you had your job offered back to you, and you chose to remain unemployed.

As time goes on i would have to think they enact something like that to keep people from blatantly / purposefully abusing / exploiting the system.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

I think what it will come down to is the unemployment benefits being tied to being "active and able for work".

I would think at some point the state(s) are figuring out what is going on and is making sure to change / enforce the language to stipulate that you must be willing to work to continue your benefits.

So, if your job calls you and says they are opening back up but you say no thanks, that should end your unemployment right there at the moment that you had your job offered back to you, and you chose to remain unemployed.

As time goes on i would have to think they enact something like that to keep people from blatantly / purposefully abusing / exploiting the system.

They already have that in place, and yes it is enforced. If an employer knows a (former) employee is refusing work it benefits the employer to report it, and Unemployment, at least in Md, will defer to the employer a lot of the time unless there is an obvious negligence/issue.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

They already have that in place, and yes it is enforced. If an employer knows a (former) employee is refusing work it benefits the employer to report it, and Unemployment, at least in Md, will defer to the employer a lot of the time unless there is an obvious negligence/issue.

Yeah that's why I'm not understanding a lot of the chatter on this subject. If an employer is offering the employee their job back and they refuse, the benefits will end. It's not as if employees can just willingly sit home and collect unemployment.

*edit apparently some states aren't enforcing the job search requirement, hence this issue exists. But if they turn down their prior job, it can end their benefits.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

Yeah that's why I'm not understanding a lot of the chatter on this subject. If an employer is offering the employee their job back and they refuse, the benefits will end. It's not as if employees can just willingly sit home and collect unemployment.

*edit apparently some states aren't enforcing the job search requirement, hence this issue exists. But if they turn down their prior job, it can end their benefits.

The chatter of why...it’s putting unnecessary pressure on welfare system, affects the economy and unemployment numbers, it affects the business owner with qualified help, and it’s the ethics of those using the system is out of wack.

People shouldn’t be getting fired for refusing their job to be on a welfare system. That’s the big fucking problem

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

It's easy to say people are just being lazy, but it's just not realistic to think someone is going to say yeah I want to return to work for $500 a week vs staying home for $900.

I agree...it just puts the business owner in a terrible spot...the actually job creator. And unfortunately, the longer it goes on it becomes dependency on the system and the tax payer. It’s not right...it’s not “in the spirit” of what the system should be...it’s a helping hand for those in need, when that need appears. It’s not a lifestyle period.