99 week-ers

[Sheherezade]

What do you all think about the extension of unemployment to people that have been unemployed for 99 weeks or longer? I'm not sure that's a great idea. I don't even think that because of deficit or costs -- it is just when does unemployment become welfare? We do still have welfare programs, right? Isn't there a different type of public assistance available for people that have been unemployed for longer than 99 weeks?

I mostly wish they'd stop saying 99 weeks and start saying 2 years. It's like calling a baby 99 weeks old. It's a game to make the time span seem shorter than it is.

Feel free to call me an idiot. I'm just perplexed by the idea that people can be on unemployment pay for 2 years or longer.

[TigerLily]

It's hard for me to have an opinion about these things because we can't know everyone's story. There will always be people who abuse the system and it would be great if those people could somehow be weeded out from the people who actually need the assistance.
It is terrible that people can be unemployed for that long. My FIL and SMIL both lost their jobs in the insurance business about 2 years ago. It is hard to make a choice to take a job that you are very over qualified for and take a huge pay cut when you can continue getting paid what you were getting paid while you're still looking for a job. Eventually they did have to make that choice and they are now working a desk job, and over nights at FedEx. We're in some tough times!
Like I said before though, the entire welfare system could be so much better, and so many problems could be fixed if we could figure out a way to only offer assistance to people who actually need it. I guess it's probably just one of those flaws that can't be fixed.

[HouseofWool]

I dunno what the right answer is, but I know that where I am currently living any job I take (and I am looking) will result in a 30-50% pay cut. Not to mention that I really don't get a serious look from the employer because I am over qualified, they all think that I would cut and run as soon as I get a better offer. After looking for 6 months-ish, I still have had very little sucess.

[ladymoreta]

Good question. I was on unemployment for a couple of months when I was laid off last year, and I was glad it was there. It doesn't pay anywhere close to your previous salary. It ended up being a little over $550 per month, when I was previously making around $4300 per month, and I lost my insurance.

It is ridiculously easy to manipulate the system, though. You're required to seek two jobs per week, and they count submitting a resume on job websites (like Monster). You almost never get a response from those, and even if you do, you can make yourself sound bad at the interview. Also, people who want to stay on unemployment can work out a system of contacts. My dad used to have his own one-man electronics repair business, and people would call him once a week asking if he was hiring. Well, no, of course not, but they could report their call as a job seeking call.

I think it shouldn't be extended past two years. While it's true someone could legitimately be looking for a job and not find one in that time, if they haven't, it's time for them to come up with a new plan. The government doesn't have an obligation to support people indefinitely. Two years is enough for the unemployed to get organized and figure out what to do with their careers. Meh, I'd even venture to say one year is plenty...

[DCJenn]

I honestly think the length of unemployment should be linked directly to the unemployment rate of your state. If you can't find a job in Texas then you're not looking. Ohio? Michigan? California? New York state? Likely different scenarios.

Jenn

[HouseofWool]

I think your idea has some merit. But for me, the only jobs I can find require that I work evenings and weekends. It would mean that I would not see Caleb. I would get him off to school in the morning and then, I wouldn't see him again until the next morning. To me that is untenable.

[GrayMatterWife]

I realize that there a some truly sad cases out there, bit in my line of work, we see a lot of people doing exactly what is being pointed out: not taking a job until beneilfits run out. A lot. Very common.

[SuzySunshine]

I've seen both sides of this argument as I've had a lot of friends laid off in the last few years. And these are young friends, in their mid 30's who shouldn't have had issues finding jobs. I think the older people, close to retirement age, are the ones that I think of that are really truly having a hard time.

Anyway, I have one friend who wanted something very specific and she took her benefits and went through most of her savings before she found it. If her benefits had run out she would have been less picky but as long as she had her benefits and her savings she stuck it out. That was her right.

I have other friends who took something as soon as they found something because it was more important to them to be employed and not take the "hand outs".

I think if people are doing it for the right reasons then there should be a way to expand the benefits for them but there are A LOT of people out there milking the system.

[MDPhDWife]

I think it shouldn't be extended past two years. While it's true someone could legitimately be looking for a job and not find one in that time, if they haven't, it's time for them to come up with a new plan. The government doesn't have an obligation to support people indefinitely. Two years is enough for the unemployed to get organized and figure out what to do with their careers. Meh, I'd even venture to say one year is plenty...

This.

When I was on unemployment, it was $300 a week and was over after 6 months. With the economy and our defecit the way it is, 12 months would probably be appropriate. Doesn't the department of labor typically offer job training and possibly assist in paying for school for those who are interested? If so, that should be a requirement after the six month mark. DD's dad has been unemployed for just over 3 years and her stepmom has been unemployed for 2 years. I'm just not buying that they couldn't find a way to support themselves and more importantly their kids in all this time.