Unemployed People Working for Free - What?

[southsider]

[quote=meems;2071620]

Should Unemployed People Work for Free | Parade.com



This really burns me. Georgia is saving $5.3 million in benefits. Guess who really saves? That's right the companies. They are saving $15 million in labor, hiring and training costs. Hello slave labor. It puts me in mind of the Welfare back to Work fiasco that occurred in New York. City workers were let go to make welfare recipients work for free.

Some points that are not brought up: They mention that 58% are hired but they do not give information on what salary reduction these people may have had to take. They do not question whether people may have gotten a job sooner or if they could have gotten a better paying job. They also do not say what the turn around rate is for people who took these jobs.[/QUOTE]


That's a whollotta assumption on your part, no?

Meems, not assumptions but questions and the answers are not there. The lack of this being brought up in the article makes me suspicious as to how beneficial this program really is to the people who are in it.

[southsider]

I agree 100% with this comment that was left on the site:

"Companies lay off employees and then blame people for not working. They love to have people working for free, that is why they support the idea for "training", "getting new skills" and so on. Speaking for myself, I don't need training, I am experienced enough. There is simply no work around for me. Jobs go abroad where labor cost is pennies. It is called outsourcing. Those companies that don't go abroad want to get free labor, idealy slave labor. But they hide the intensions behind nice word and pretend that they care."


Here is the problem............Now people won't get jobs unless they work for free if this is implemented all over the place. My DH is currently laid off.........just thrown away like a piece of fricken garbage after investing himself into his job for 7 years at a level 9. As both my DH and I cried they spewed NOTHING but lies from their mouths......."oh, don't worry....we will help you find a job......it will be ok" etc etc......and they have done NOTHING.

Sorry, but he has already paid his dues......he already worked for free during his college years doing his internships and then volunteering and then working as a substitute. He even went back to school and got MORE education--paying 100% of this on his own. Now he can't get hired because he has too much experience and they want to hire people with ZERO experience because they are cheaper (quality does NOT matter when it comes to educating those of the future.........as long as the teacher is cheap.)

The people that are "volunteering" aren't really "volunteering".........they are in an awful predicament and they are HOPING that this leads to employment. The disgusting thing is there is NOT even guaranteed employment! They said in the article only 58% get hired. AND if this does get implemented all over the place then it will be slave labor honestly because then the only way to get a job will be to work for free with the hope they hire you. What employer is going to turn down free labor after all?
UGH.......one of these days there is going to be an uprising.........a civil war of sorts between have and have nots.

You hit on the point I was trying to bring up. I read in a book that referenced an article in the New York Times (IIRC). (Discovering America as it is) It was dealing with the Welfare Back to Work Program in New York City. What it said they did was let city workers go and made people work these city jobs for free. Those city jobs by the way were good paying union jobs. They had to do this in order to keep their benefits. They were supposed to get help with baby sitting but often times they were hitches and yet they still had to show up to work or they lost their benefits even if they had no way to pay for babysitting. One example the auther mentioned was that of an elderly lady who was had to carry an oxygen tank being forced to pick up trash and leaves in the park.

Although such abuses are not mentioned in the article I see too many things to read between the lines that make me suspicious that the same things are going on here. I also have some suspicions that this may be used for payback for campaign contributions or other kick backs. Then too Maybe I am also suspicious because Georgia does have a history of slave labour. Didn't anybody ever hear of chain gangs that were so prevelant not only in Georgia but also in the South?

http://www.njhm.com/burns.html

[wealthybarney]

Southsider you've got a mind like a steel trap! Eegads! I do hope someday you at least go into local politics. You would give the slick/tricky ones a run for their money, & I would like to see that!

[southsider]

We've been there too.....and we resorted to taking a temp job that we knew eventually would end...in hopes it would lead us to a job....and that temp job paid at a ridiculous horrible rate...but technically it was better than unemployment...and offered no benefits, no insurance...just a crappy way for a certain cell phone company that starts with a S to hire there engineers on the cheap. When the economy busted...it became impossible for DH to get a new job....either too much experience, not enough experience...or not the right experience. bah!

I don't necessarily mind someone receiving some services being asked to do maybe some charity work or actual service work....you know doing a little work for the Red Cross or something like that for free to get food stamps as an example. But I agree that your regular employers should not be allowed to get away with this.

Been there - done that too. The people who took those kinds of jobs were called perma-temps. I had one that lasted about three years. They always dangled the carrot that the job would be made permanent but it would just be a little while longer. There I was no sick pay, no vacation time, no health benefits, only a fraction of the pay and no pension or profit sharing for my time. It was damned if you do and a damned if you don't situation. I ended up having to take a second part time job to make ends meet. People do not realize how easy that can burn you out. I had to let the second job go because of the lack of time I ended up spending more money to buy food and h & b and what was left after was not worth the extra hours I worked. It also hurt when I had to have a short paycheck when I took off time to go on job interviews. Some I had to let go because I could not take too much time off at once.

[southsider]

All of this is well and good.. I want to know how they are getting around the Dept of Labor laws. There is a law that says a company can not replace a paid position with a volunteer. That a business can not benefit from the labors of an individual that is not compensated for the job they are performing. .... In other words, if it is a paid position, historically someone has been paid to do the job, you can not displace a paid individual with a volunteer.
I use to do vocational assessments for individuals with disabilities. The Dept of Labor came out and did a whole training for me and my staff on what we could and could not do in the work place. This was a big sticking point.... if an individual swept a floor, we had to save the dirt and re-spread it on the floor before we left. Anything they did, we had to undo it.
So how are they getting around the Dept of Labor?

Conservative Judges that do not uphold the law but find ways to twist around it.

[southsider]

Southsider you've got a mind like a steel trap! Eegads! I do hope someday you at least go into local politics. You would give the slick/tricky ones a run for their money, & I would like to see that!

Hang around with slime long enough and it sticks to you. I don't know if I could put up with the filth clinging to me.

In order to make a difference it would take more than one person in office. To put those new people in - it would talk a lot of people getting fed up with how things are going - it would take a lot of those people who aren't registered to vote because they think that their vote does not matter and it is not worth the chance of having to take time of of work without pay for jury duty because they use the voter rolls to get people for jury duty.

It would also take actually having a real media instead of the propaganda mill we have now that refuses to bring up these issues. But that is what you get when you allow large corporations to take over the airwaves for profit instead of giving their portion to the public trust. Remember how DK got pushed out of the so called debates. Their were pretty much a show for Clinton and Obama. The fix was in for Obama to get the Presidency. How often does a junior senator get a private interview with the President who happens to be of the other party? The same thing happened with Bush too.

Then too why do we as a citizens also put up with debate without all parties and ones that contain just canidates from the two largest party? Why do we put up with allowing them to determine what the debate is going to be? It was so much better when the League of Women Voters ran the debates. You actually had some good questions and not stupid things about jewelery and underwear.

[Dengineer]

Conservative Judges that do not uphold the law but find ways to twist around it.

You're so right--the really big problem we're facing today is too much conservatism.

[NIGHTB1022]

All of this is well and good.. I want to know how they are getting around the Dept of Labor laws. There is a law that says a company can not replace a paid position with a volunteer. That a business can not benefit from the labors of an individual that is not compensated for the job they are performing. .... In other words, if it is a paid position, historically someone has been paid to do the job, you can not displace a paid individual with a volunteer.
I use to do vocational assessments for individuals with disabilities. The Dept of Labor came out and did a whole training for me and my staff on what we could and could not do in the work place. This was a big sticking point.... if an individual swept a floor, we had to save the dirt and re-spread it on the floor before we left. Anything they did, we had to undo it.
So how are they getting around the Dept of Labor?

Can you give me a link to this? That is exactly what heppened to me a month ago. I got booted out of my management position by a "good old boy" from the club I managed who volunteered to do it for free. I worked there almost a year and one day I came to work and got told my position had been phased out in a meeting. the next day, I heard they gave it to a guy that volunteered to do it for free.

I got my unemployment, but it isn't squat, and by the way southsider, unemployment works this way:

"Operating as a federal-state partnership, UC (unemployment compensation) is based on federal law, but administered by the states. The UC program is unique among U.S. social insurance programs in that it is funded almost totally by either federal or state taxes paid by employers. Currently, employers pay federal unemployment taxes of 6.2 percent on the first $7,000 earned by each of their employees during a calendar year. These federal taxes are used to cover the costs of administering the UC programs in all states. In addition, the federal UC taxes pay one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provide for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits."


Not as you posted "I guess you do not understand how unemployment works. Companies pay insurance companies. When one of their employees is laid off their is a claim against the insurance company."

[Dengineer]

I got my unemployment, but it isn't squat, and by the way southsider, unemployment works this way:

"Operating as a federal-state partnership, UC (unemployment compensation) is based on federal law, but administered by the states. The UC program is unique among U.S. social insurance programs in that it is funded almost totally by either federal or state taxes paid by employers. Currently, employers pay federal unemployment taxes of 6.2 percent on the first $7,000 earned by each of their employees during a calendar year. These federal taxes are used to cover the costs of administering the UC programs in all states. In addition, the federal UC taxes pay one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provide for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits."


Not as you posted "I guess you do not understand how unemployment works. Companies pay insurance companies. When one of their employees is laid off their is a claim against the insurance company."

Thanks for this clarification. I think southsider was trying to find a way to blame "companies" for EVERYTHING that is wrong in the entire world.

[southsider]

Can you give me a link to this? That is exactly what heppened to me a month ago. I got booted out of my management position by a "good old boy" from the club I managed who volunteered to do it for free. I worked there almost a year and one day I came to work and got told my position had been phased out in a meeting. the next day, I heard they gave it to a guy that volunteered to do it for free.

I got my unemployment, but it isn't squat, and by the way southsider, unemployment works this way:

"Operating as a federal-state partnership, UC (unemployment compensation) is based on federal law, but administered by the states. The UC program is unique among U.S. social insurance programs in that it is funded almost totally by either federal or state taxes paid by employers. Currently, employers pay federal unemployment taxes of 6.2 percent on the first $7,000 earned by each of their employees during a calendar year. These federal taxes are used to cover the costs of administering the UC programs in all states. In addition, the federal UC taxes pay one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provide for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits."


Not as you posted "I guess you do not understand how unemployment works. Companies pay insurance companies. When one of their employees is laid off their is a claim against the insurance company."

Companies have to pay a least a portion of your unemployment benefits. They are able request a denial of your benefits. I had a problem with one former employer and from what I was told by the worker at the unemployment office, this happens fairly often. I have worked in accounting most of my adult life and I have seen the payments for this insurance at companies I have worked for. Maybe this is not done in all states. The FUTA tax you are talking about is Federal. States also raise their own portions.

Another interesting side note:

Unemployment benefits - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Taxation

The argument for taxation of social welfare benefits is that they result in a realized gain for a taxpayer. The argument against taxation is that the benefits are generally less than the federal poverty level.
Unemployment compensation has been taxable by the federal government since 1987.[15] Code Section 85 deemed unemployment compensation included in gross income.[16] Federal taxes are not withheld from unemployment compensation at the time of payment unless requested by the recipient using Form W-4V.[15][17]
In 2003, Rep. Philip English introduced legislation to repeal the taxation of unemployment compensation, but the legislation did not advance past committee.[15][18] Most states with income tax consider unemployment compensation to be taxable.[15]
Prior to 1987, unemployment compensation amounts were excluded from federal gross income.[19]
For the US Federal tax year of 2009, as a result of the signing of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 signed by Barack Obama on February 17, 2009 the first $2,400 worth of unemployment income received during the 'tax year' of 2009 will be exempted from being considered as taxable income on the Federal level, when American taxpayers file their 2009 IRS tax return paperwork in early 2010.