advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: deckeda
Date: April 30, 2020 12:57PM
[www.washingtonpost.com]

"Generally, states have the legal right to revoke benefits if unemployed Americans are offered jobs comparable to their past positions yet decline to take them. In response to the novel coronavirus, regulators also have put in place special exemptions to protect people out of work because they’re sick or caring for family members diagnosed with covid-19."

U.S. Labor Dept. agrees of course, "“Barring unusual circumstances” the agency said in public guidance, “a request that a furloughed employee return to his or her job very likely constitutes an offer of suitable employment that the employee must accept.”

"“I would argue having to go back to wait tables during a pandemic might not count as similar working conditions,” said Michele Evermore, a senior policy analyst at the National Employment Law Project. She said workers could challenge such reversals of benefits, but doing so might be tough."

Doesn't matter.

Tennessee:
"will "potentially disqualify claimants from receiving unemployment insurance benefits” if workers who are temporarily laid off turn down an opportunity to retake their jobs, said Chris Cannon, a spokesman for the state’s unemployment agency."

Oklahoma made their contempt public:
“If there is a claimant out there that says, 'You know what, I can make more money sitting at home, drawing this extra $600, and some other benefits, then if the employer will contact us, that is considered a refusal of civil work and we will cut off their benefits,” said Teresa Thomas Keller, the deputy director of the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, during the call conducted over Zoom and published online. The Frontier, a Tulsa news outlet, first reported on the meeting.

“I know that’s been a concern,” Keller continued. “When I first saw it, I thought, ‘Gee, some of these claimants will be making more money on unemployment than they did while they were working,’ but that will be a temporary situation.”

"In response, Sean Kouplen, the state’s secretary of commerce, said it was “the best news that I have heard all day,” adding he had witnessed such reluctance to work firsthand. “I have a lot of companies, and we’re trying to hire people back. And they’re saying, ‘nope, we’re good, we’re making plenty of money on the unemployment piece.’ So I really appreciate you saying that.”

Saying things such as "I think" and "I thought" and "making money" and other nonsense just reveals the lie plainly.

"Keller later added Oklahoma even could potentially stop sending residents the additional $600 per week in federal unemployment aid authorized under the Cares Act in an attempt to compel people to return to work more quickly. “If it was a huge problem, and we felt like people were taking advantage, we could cut it off,” she said."

These @#$%& are in a circle jerk of misguided ideology and hatred for the very workers they're barely paying in the first place.

Kouplen does actually understand the need for financial assistance however ... if it's for him:

"Kouplen himself is a local businessman: He is the chief executive of Regent Bank in Tulsa as well as a local restaurant, which he said recently had to let go of a handful of workers — but now is hiring them back with the help of federal small-business funds."

IOKIYAAR
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Racer X
Date: April 30, 2020 07:54PM
How can the state government FORCE me to go to work? Will they arrest me? Will they sue me?

Sending me to a known unhealthy work environment is against the law. But revoking unemployment benefits if you turn down equivalent work is well within their rights, and the agreement you make with unemployment in every state. It sucks, but there IS a choice.



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/30/2020 08:03PM by Racer X.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: deckeda
Date: April 30, 2020 09:05PM
Wait -- so what's the choice again?

Lose unemployment because the government disagrees your work is unsafe? Because I forget what the other option is here.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Racer X
Date: May 01, 2020 02:35AM
Forcing involves using power or force. Compelling means using non violent means to get your way.

You compel your kid to do homework by saying they can't go to the party.

You force your kid to do their homework by chaining them to their desk until they complete their work.

You may think its a distinction without difference, but the difference is HUGE.

The states can compel you to go back to work, but they can't force you. You have the legal right to not work if you don't want to. The result of not working can be a big deal, but you have that choice. It's one of those pesky Rights from our Constitution that get in the way of the Government doing what THEY want to do, regardless of what we want.

In old communist Russia, you didn't have a choice.



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2020 02:37AM by Racer X.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: deckeda
Date: May 01, 2020 06:45AM
Oh now I see that your objection is to MY wording. OK, you’re right, there will be no chains or at-gunpoint happening.

Let me try and rephrase the issue here, to see if you give a @#$%& about the issue enough to be upset about it or if you see any wrongdoing.

- it’s generally considered either risky or dumb to interact with other people at this time

- some states and parts of the federal government (and therefore the people who run them) are ignoring this in their desire to help business owners regain business

- laws or their interpreters are shown to ignore the first part, meaning that any invitation to return to work = safe environment

You mentioned that could be unlawful, which is pretty much what my subject line was getting at, especially since I included a question mark in it.

So the question remains, if based on what we’ve read in the published story something smells like it’s unlawful here, to say nothing of unethical or immoral possibly, do you CARE enough to be upset at the people causing this scenario? Are they worthy of your contempt, or does such a feeling play no part in how you feel, because officials somehow do things in a vacuum with no connection to the NEXT decision they’ll make about subsequent issues?

People can stay home, but if they are compelled to make a choice with no good outcomes at their own peril, how is that actually a “choice” in reality? We don’t don’t give children an effective choice because our power is so compelling as to be effectively NO choice, and that my friend is forcing their hand. The chains are there just the same, at that point.

So let’s please not get caught up in semantics here, and miss the point of the story. Fair?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Racer X
Date: May 01, 2020 08:07AM
hey, I'm collecting unemployment. I get it. But to get the money, it has strings attached. It's a gamble going back right now.

Lots of people joined the military to get an education. But then they got sent to the Sandbox. That was ALWAYS a possibility. It goes with the agreement. They have NO right to complain. You want the unemployment money? It has strings attached

But my partner has stayed working. It's impossible to social distance in a preschool/daycare. But she does the job anyway. She and her staff take care of kids so their parents can work in hospitals and at the University of Washington Medical School and Hospital looking for effective treatment and maybe even potential cure or vaccines.

But its important to remember those idiot politicians were elected. They can also get tossed out of office. Maybe the people could be working on recalling the @#$%& politicians while sitting at home.

I'm on the mailing lists for my city, county state and national politicians for my home. You can bet that I tell them when they are doing a @#$%& job, but I do it constructively too. I also send a Thank You if they do something good.

Those governors need to get hammered in social media, e-mails and complaints to their congress-people.



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: May 01, 2020 01:01PM
Racer X is right about the way things are. Deckeda is right in pointing out that this structure unfairly burdens the weakest parties (individual workers) with the greatest risk-taking.

An unemployment system that tells you that you must report to work before it's safe to work or lose your surrogate livelihood is not a legitimate system. It may be the system you signed up for (because it was the only one available to you), but your forced consent doesn't legitimize it - it just sanctions it.



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: May 01, 2020 03:31PM
If you are trying to force workers to go back to work because $600 in unemployment benefits is way more than they can make at work, maybe you need to be paying more.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Racer X
Date: May 01, 2020 06:23PM
Now that's just crazy talk.

My partner is the director of a preschool/daycare. Unemployment and that extra $600 is WAY more than the peon workers earn. Now, the problem is that those that have others raise/educate their kids either can't afford, or aren't willing to, pay enough to support a fair wage. @#$%& situation. Payroll is @85% of their budget. No fat to cut.

Most families having kids the parents are in their 30s or so. That demographic in society typically isn't making good money yet. But that is when the best time window to have kids from a biological standpoint.



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: RgrF
Date: May 01, 2020 07:10PM
That actually illustrates the problem, those parent ought to be paid a wage that allows them to pay your significant's school enough for them to compensate school employees at a living wage.

None of that happens.

Instead all the money that might otherwise be available to do these things gets lodged into investment accounts of the upper 2-3% of the populace and people who actually have to work for a living get to scrape by.

Well some scrape by, others just fall off the cliff.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: deckeda
Date: May 01, 2020 07:37PM
Quote
rjmacs
... An unemployment system that tells you that you must report to work before it's safe to work or lose your surrogate livelihood is not a legitimate system. ....

Yes that was my surely my point. The States can't have it both ways here.

Agreeing to strings attached is only relevant when the strings don't get changed after you agree to them. I'm not understanding why RacerX doesn't seem to think such "an agreement" conflicts with common sense.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Cue the lawsuits against states forcing workers to come back?
Posted by: Racer X
Date: May 01, 2020 09:08PM
The pandemic has no bearing on the laws and agreements involving Unemployment.

Restaurant closes up for 2 months. Fire or Covid-19, doesn't matter. Workers collect unemployment. Situation changes and restaurant opens. You get called back to work, and say Hell No. You broke the agreement, they can cut you off. Not WILL cut you off, but they have the legal right to. MAY cut you off. People are getting would up about maybes.

Sucks, yes. But that's the deal.

Once again, I'm on unemployment. I get it. But in order to get that money, I had to agree to certain things.

Everyone needs to contact their lawmakers immediately and LOUDLY and get the agreements rewritten, or exemptions put in place.

They have already made a concession you know. The job search requirement has been waived until further notice. You can stay home and be safe. BUT if you get called back, you gotta go, or risk your claim.



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2020 11:51PM by Racer X.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 223
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 2330 on October 25, 2018