Unemployment benefits

[cptacek]

How long do you think unemployment benefits should last?

[nck4857]

All I know is that the continuous extending of unemployment benefits severely degrades the motivation for some of the unemployed to seek new jobs. I know of several personal examples of this. Also, I strongly feel that anyone receiving unemployment benefits should be subject to drug testing in order to receive these benefits. FWIW.

[snshijuptr]

I'm not sure how long the benefit should last, but I wish there was more of a job seeking requirement. Something like having to log onto a job listing website and either apply for jobs, take educational webinars, or something. Basically something more than just monetary support.

With that said, I'm so thankful that we had unemployment to get us through this summer while my husband was an unemployed teacher.

[Thrif-t]

I too know someone who's been on unemployment for a year and a half and hasn't bothered looking for a job. He generally qualifies for lower paying jobs so is able to have this extended vacation with no worries by doing some under the table jobs. But on the flip side there are a lot of higher paid professionals unable to find jobs so this is their safety net. I'm conflicted on this because of the two extremes.

[kork13]

I think 3-6 months of unemployment benefits is reasonable. Most people should be able to secure at least some form of employment by then, and having it shorter would prevent wild abuse of the system. I recognize that for some professions, job-finding can be more difficult, but at the same time, I figure if you're unemployed, your 9-5 job is now to find employment. If someone's honestly putting the effort into finding a job, they're going to find one.

[maat55]

Unemployment benefits promote idleness, abuse and lack of savings. 3 months tops.

[jIM_Ohio]

Unemployment benefits promote idleness, abuse and lack of savings. 3 months tops.

what he (she?) said.

[wincrasher]

Unemployement is insurance. An insurance premium your employer paid instead of giving the money to you.

It's not charity. There is no shame in taking it - you paid for it essentially.

So I think the benefits should go as long as it takes for you to find a job. Unless you were making minimum wage, unemployment is not much money. You have every incentive to find a job if you can - you want to make money and not loose your house, car, etc and feed your family.

[bjl584]

I personally watched my friend turn unemployment benefits into a lifestyle. He had no motivation to seek employment, as the government continued to pass extensions. He spent most of his free time at the local bar. Now I realize that this example is not exactly true of everyone on unemployment. I'm sure that many people on unemployment are actively working to secure new employment and get back on their feet. However, my friend serves as a prime example of someone that is abusing the system. I realize that people pay into unemployment, but what is the tipping point? At what point is the money that someone paid in exhausted and any future benefits will have to come from the taxpayers at large? I am fine with unemployment up until the point that the money that someone put in is gone. After that, it has to be cut off. There also needs to be some kind of proactive system in place to help people seek employment, get schooling, network, etc. This would be far favorable to the current system of logging onto the internet once a week, filing a claim, and having the state mail you a check.

[EEinNJ]

Interesting- people are against it until it happens to them. In my state, there are eligibility requirements, job search requirements, and they check. There are also training and referral programs.

If you work in a professional capacity in the corporate world, it can take 3 months to get through the hiring process AFTER you find a lead on a position. In times of high unemployment, it can take a long time to land a new job. I know people who've been out of work over a year, and they're not deadbeats gaming the system- and people who've lost a job don't deserve to be treated like criminals by submitting to drug testing!

[MonkeyMama]

I'd say, it depends.

Most people game the system. No doubt about it. Hell, all of my small business clients are fighting employees who QUIT perfectly good jobs and claimed unemployment. They all tell me, "He/she would take UI and THEN look for another job, if they could. That's how they are." There's not much fight - not with written notice. IT just blows my mind that they think they could get away with it. That it is SO common!

Likewise, have known tons of people who didn't look for jobs until UI ran out.

In fact, we were written off as idiots for not taking extended unemployment when my spouse gave up looking for a job. HE decided to stay home with our child, and our friends would be like, "You aren't taking UI??? No one will ever know!" Sorry, I have a stronger moral fiber than the masses. I know we ALL pay for it, somehow or other. I am not interested in gaming the system.

I do believe in UI For people who truly need it. & it may be longer for some people. (For example, a struggling industry where retraining may be needed).

When we had unemployment, we didn't need it in the least. Which leads me to say their should be some "household income" limit, as well. If your spouse makes six figures, do you really NEED unemployment???

GEtting UI benefits requires merely being laid off, here. That's it. I think there should be more hoops to jump through, personally.

[Caoineag]

Under 6 months. Everyone here has covered the employees who abuse it (we've all seen examples of this) but I have also seen the employers who abuse it. Seriously either call them back to work or accept that you are going to have to retrain someone new. Letting your workforce sit on unemployment to keep your expenses down is a waste. Let them get new jobs or call them back to work after 6 months.

[bjl584]

Interesting- people are against it until it happens to them. In my state, there are eligibility requirements, job search requirements, and they check. There are also training and referral programs.

If you work in a professional capacity in the corporate world, it can take 3 months to get through the hiring process AFTER you find a lead on a position. In times of high unemployment, it can take a long time to land a new job. I know people who've been out of work over a year, and they're not deadbeats gaming the system- and people who've lost a job don't deserve to be treated like criminals by submitting to drug testing!

I have to disagree with your assumtion that EVERYONE is against UI until it happens to them. I'm sure that there are a lot of people, probably a lot on these boards that are against extended UI even if it did happen to them. As far as drug testing, I had to take a drug test before I started my current job, and i don't feel like a criminal. It is a condition of employment at almost ANY job to be subjected to random drug testing and to remain drug free, so why can't it be a condition of unemployment as well?

[Goldy1]

My husband just took a job an dhe had 9 months of UI left and that's if they dont' extend it again. (and again ad nauseum)

I also know another guy who took a voluntary lay off so he could stay home and avoid daycare costs while he wife works. That kinda burns me, but what can I do? The guy leaves basically on purpose to get a free vacation or lifestyle change, while others struggle.

I think going into 2 years is too long. period. I get scared of crime going up, but doesn't idle time cause crime anyway. (I heard a quote saying crime will go up if UI is not extended)

[Goldy1]

So if UI in MI is now like 99 weeks, do you guys think it will ever end? are we going to get 5 years over here? I know you initially get 26 weeks, but I know a guy who said after getting that, extensions, and then he got another 26 weeks! geez