View from the Center and Left Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (50922)	2/28/2008 10:44:44 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 542764

OK, so I got the program wrong. But why should an employer of a part time seasonal worker be on the hook for this either? And look at the comments to that blog post for some other examples. For example "Ah, the joys of no longer being a California employer. The worst one I remember was being charged for an employee who resigned (with no notice) to take another job. Two years later the state charged our account for him, as the new employer had gone out of business and they couldn't tap that employers account..." So the employer is on the hook for an former employee, who quit without notice two years ago... or see "I had a satelite office in Iowa where the office manager hired a girl that should never have been hired. She had "scammer" written all over her. Sure enough, she stopped coming in on the 29th day of her employment and filed for unemployment. It turns out that you only need to be employed for 30 days in Iowa to collect and it really doesn't matter the hows or whys she left. The only thing that saved me was she counted how many days she had been employed wrong. She was HOPPING MAD, there were threats of violence against my manager. It was pretty ugly." or "Many years back in Texas we had an ex-employee file for unemployment against our account, claiming we had laid him off. We had never laid off anyone, he had simply disappeared one day. At the hearing I offered him his job back effective immediately (I knew him personally as a good guy who also was a great asset on our softball team). The hearing officer would have none of that and ruled that his benefits were chargeable to us and the fact that he had a job offer from us did not effect his eligibility to continue to collect unemployment. I stopped going to those hearings after that. There's no point if you can't win no matter the evidence." If you make it more expensive to hire people (and esp. if you do so in ways that seem unfair to employees) then you push down employment.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next