Applying for a job you're not qualified for? You could get in trouble under a proposed Iowa law

[TBoneTX 45,570]

This has potential and drawbacks.  It minimizes gaming of the system, but it would almost certainly spawn lawsuits alleging discrimination.  What do we think about that, plus other aspects?

Quote

Applying for a job you're not qualified for? You could get in trouble under a proposed Iowa law

Kevin Hardy, Des Moines Register
Published 6:00 a.m. CT Feb. 7, 2019

Applying for a great job that seems like a bit of a reach?

You could face big penalties under proposed legislation in the Iowa Senate.

As legislators look to make changes to the state's unemployment system, Iowa Sen. Jim Carlin, R-Sioux City, has crafted a bill targeting what he calls the habitually unemployed.

Carlin and other lawmakers believe some unemployed workers frequently apply for jobs they aren't qualified for as a means of maintaining their weekly benefits.

His bill, Senate File 99, would allow employers to report job applicants who are "manifestly unqualified." After three such reports, Iowa Workforce Development could initiate an investigation and issue penalties, including revoking unemployment benefits.

The legislation, which came under attack from labor unions at a Monday subcommittee meeting, was tabled. But Carlin said he's committed to addressing the population of people who stay on unemployment for long periods of time.

"I do have some difficulty understanding why somebody can't find a job in six months," he said. "That's just a tough sell."

Story continues here:

https://www.press-citizen.com/story/money/business/2019/02/07/iowa-law-legislation-penalty-apply-jobs-unqualified-unemployment-iowa-workforce-development-senate/2777960002/

 

 

Edited February 7, 2019 by TBoneTX

[NikLR 13,228]

In Canada the EI system will pay for you to learn a new trade.  Rather like the GI bill for veterans.  You also can't stay on it forever, there's a time limit for distribution and that's based on your payments into the system and period of time you worked before applying for unemployment.  (You're also ineligible if you were fired or quit unless the quitting was due to moving to be with immediate family like a spouse or parent.)  So perhaps rather than penalizing people for applying for jobs with which they have no experience, since you can't get experience without someone giving you a chance after all, why not put a time limit on unemployment payments?  Change the way unemployment payments work so that people can't abuse them quite so much. 

[TBoneTX 45,570]

Good points.  There used to be time limits (and maybe there still are), but the government kept extending them to the point of perceived (actual?) permanence.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

I have used un employment once in my life. I figured after 30 years of paying in why not. I lied like a druken Dr Ford about applying for jobs i had not. I thinks its standard procedure. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

5 minutes ago, NikLR said:

In Canada the EI system will pay for you to learn a new trade.  Rather like the GI bill for veterans.  You also can't stay on it forever, there's a time limit for distribution and that's based on your payments into the system and period of time you worked before applying for unemployment.  (You're also ineligible if you were fired or quit unless the quitting was due to moving to be with immediate family like a spouse or parent.)  So perhaps rather than penalizing people for applying for jobs with which they have no experience, since you can't get experience without someone giving you a chance after all, why not put a time limit on unemployment payments?  Change the way unemployment payments work so that people can't abuse them quite so much. 

There is generally a 6 month limit, but was extended during the recession, but back to 6 months now.  In Ga also you can not get benefits if you are fired for cause or quit.

 

That is why it is so important to document and use progressive discipline. 

[NikLR 13,228]

13 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

There is generally a 6 month limit, but was extended during the recession, but back to 6 months now.  In Ga also you can not get benefits if you are fired for cause or quit.

 

That is why it is so important to document and use progressive discipline. 

In the USA it's obviously a state issue, not a federal one.  with 50 states it would be hard to understand when they're all on the same page. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

   

1 hour ago, NikLR said:

In Canada the EI system will pay for you to learn a new trade.  Rather like the GI bill for veterans.  You also can't stay on it forever, there's a time limit for distribution and that's based on your payments into the system and period of time you worked before applying for unemployment.  (You're also ineligible if you were fired or quit unless the quitting was due to moving to be with immediate family like a spouse or parent.)  So perhaps rather than penalizing people for applying for jobs with which they have no experience, since you can't get experience without someone giving you a chance after all, why not put a time limit on unemployment payments?  Change the way unemployment payments work so that people can't abuse them quite so much. 

 

   I think it's similar here, but like everything else, each state has a lot of control over eligibility laws. I know people who have been fired and they have a hell of a time getting UI benefits. The law is supposed to distinguish between being fired for misconduct (ineligible for benefits) and performance (still eligible), but employers will go to great lengths to frame everything as misconduct if they can. I've seen cases where employees should be fired for poor job performance, but the employer will instead monitor the employee for things like attendance, breaks and things like that and wait until they can terminate them for misconduct.

 

  The system is not really fair as an insurance type of system though. Many people get away with abusing it, while others have never used it and get denied when they try. Insurance doesn't really work that way. You would think the more you use UI, the more difficult it would be. Or maybe your payment into the system would increase if you have used it more.

 

  I would like to see UI work more like the way they handle extended illness banks or even how we accrue vacation time. You pay in every paycheck and your employer matches. Every year that you work, and you get get a set amount of UI time you can claim back if you ever need it. The longer you work, the more you are eligible to take if something ever happens. Not as many questions asked if you ever need it, but also an incentive not to use it until you really need it. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

8 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   

 

   I think it's similar here, but like everything else, each state has a lot of control over eligibility laws. I know people who have been fired and they have a hell of a time getting UI benefits. The law is supposed to distinguish between being fired for misconduct (ineligible for benefits) and performance (still eligible), but employers will go to great lengths to frame everything as misconduct if they can. I've seen cases where employees should be fired for poor job performance, but the employer will instead monitor the employee for things like attendance, breaks and things like that and wait until they can terminate them for misconduct.

 

  The system is not really fair as an insurance type of system though. Many people get away with abusing it, while others have never used it and get denied when they try. Insurance doesn't really work that way. You would think the more you use UI, the more difficult it would be. Or maybe your payment into the system would increase if you have used it more.

 

  I would like to see UI work more like the way they handle extended illness banks or even how we accrue vacation time. You pay in every paycheck and your employer matches. Every year that you work, and you get get a set amount of UI time you can claim back if you ever need it. The longer you work, the more you are eligible to take if something ever happens. Not as many questions asked if you ever need it, but also an incentive not to use it until you really need it. 

Here you probably will not get unemployment if fired for cause , including job performance.  You need to have it documented and prove you had given them a chance to improve 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

10 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I have used un employment once in my life. I figured after 30 years of paying in why not. I lied like a druken Dr Ford about applying for jobs i had not. I thinks its standard procedure. 

 

10 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

There is generally a 6 month limit, but was extended during the recession, but back to 6 months now.  In Ga also you can not get benefits if you are fired for cause or quit.

 

That is why it is so important to document and use progressive discipline. 

Same here as well. I used it for 6 months back in 2010 after leaving Qatar and trying to figure out what was going in my life at the time. I was paid $455 a week on unemployment and I have vowed never to go on it again at all. At the time in NC you could get it for up to a year as well but now it's down to 6 months again. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I have never taken it, but my wife at the time took it for about 3 months in NC.  It was a pittance.  Hardly worth the time to stand in line and file for it.  So much easier to go out and get a new job, which she did.