Unemployment follow up

[platter]

(VIDEO)

by Amanda Hara

SMYRNA, Tenn. - If you are collecting unemployment benefits, you'd better keep reading.

The extension President Obama signed may not apply to you.

After 13 years with Whirlpool, James Johnson learned the plant was shutting down and that his job was over. That was two years ago.

Johnson's been drawing unemployment for 99 weeks, and thought the new piece of legislation would extend the help.

Like so many others, Johnson misunderstood what the extension really means.

"Individuals who had already received the maximum number of weeks of eligibility would not qualify for any additional benefits," Don Ingram with the Department of Labor said.

Before the new legislation was signed, federal unemployment would have run out last month. The extension continues it for another year, but only for people who have been getting help for less than 99 weeks.

"I can certainly understand why everyone was confused," Ingram said.

Ingram said not everyone qualifies for the maximum of 99 weeks. The number of weeks of eligibility is determined by the claimant's earnings during their Base Period.

With no money coming in, Johnson said he'll fall back on what he knows best: performing music.

For folks currently enrolled in unemployment benefits who haven't exhausted their 99 weeks, there is no need to re-apply.

Email: [email protected]

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/13750495/unemployment-benefits-extension-confuses-many

[tobee43]

'Ifonly" Thanks that makes sense. So, we aren't complaining as things are going up by shortages (fuel) due to PresBO not allowing us to get our own product but letting us buy it from his brothers instead, and now the weather (Global Warming at 20 degrees in Orlando) so vegis' go up, then once the fiat money hits the system more inflation. "Don't hit a man when he's down. Stab him instead". Seems as our Government is now doing to the middle class (now heading down). 'Hub

hub...just hand over the sword and let's get it over with...i don't want little stabs...i want the entire head cut off at once....

this chipping away at us is killing us slowly.....it's so cold here what's up with that??? it's becoming the norm...this is our 3rd winter here and i have to wear leggings and leg warmers....and down coats....explain that please...LOL!!!

[AngelinaCatHub]

'Ifonly" Thanks that makes sense. So, we aren't complaining as things are going up by shortages (fuel) due to PresBO not allowing us to get our own product but letting us buy it from his brothers instead, and now the weather (Global Warming at 20 degrees in Orlando) so vegis' go up, then once the fiat money hits the system more inflation. "Don't hit a man when he's down. Stab him instead". Seems as our Government is now doing to the middle class (now heading down). 'Hub

[tobee43]

well i have 3 degrees and am now going back to as on PP put it...the university of burgers....since walmart now requires a masters to be a greeter...which i have...unfortunately in the wrong field...LOL!!!!!

you were smart to have not taken one of those positions...that's all they do now...part time temp jobs...and keep rehiring etc. terrible. no health ins...any benefits whatsoever.

and by the way...my son in law did in fact lie on an application stating he did NOT have a masters degree....that county found out and he was banned for lying!!!!

they moved out of state!

[Ifonly]

Oops, no, typo, sorry! I just realized I wrote, "worked". I should have said, "so, I would work...." meaning I never accepted any of those interviews because I didn't want to put myself into that situation - where I could bust my butt, have the contract end, and then not even have UI as a stop gap, especially since the court based our 13 payments on my UI payments.

That's awful about your husband. I see this more and more frequently in my line of work. What people don't realize is that it is no longer "dead weight" or "under-educated" folks being let go and unable to find other employment. It is is incredibly experienced, educated people who, actually, do contribute a great deal. They companies simply decide that they can fill that level of expertise more cheaply and so what if the job is only done half as well? It is the "penny wise, pound foolish" way of new American business; or the "hey, it's good enough" mentality. I can't tell you how many laws my last part time employer was breaking (my little part time gig I had until this past June). They simply didn't care because they didn't get caught and, if they did, a slap on the wrist and they would go right back to breaking the law. I love it when I read random comments on the internet that the unemployed need better job training and need to go back to school. Yeah, so I can have a third degree to be overqualified with. And the advice to dumb down your resume? Even if I were willing to lie (which I'm not), how do I hide the fact that I was a Controller/CFO and then the Sr. VP of Finance for almost a decade? I'd have to ERASE my resume, LOL.

[tobee43]

ifonly...so you were with one of the pharmaceuticals in nj as a contract employee??? oh i know that one.......well my husband was with the one company that got purchased.....and he was one of the first laid off because he was a contracted..... contracted employee.......LOL!!!!!!!! in other words he worked for a company hired by the pharmaceuticals as contractors for that area of expertize... of course when the other company was going to take over they had their own contract company....although since my husband was the "top" person...he went first since he had the highest salary...he had been there 15 years....but before that was with the state for over 30 years...so EU had a few places to draw from for him....

[Ifonly]

Yes, the only calls I received for interviews (all three of them, LOL) after being laid off were for "temp to perm" contract work for the pharmaceuticals in NJ. So, I worked on a 1099 for seven months or so, pay both sides of FICA, no benefits, etc. and if they don't hire me, I'm not eligible for UI after the seven months are up because I would have been self-employed. Thanks, but no thanks.

I was terrified with the day care since I made $4,000 over four and half months but I had so much work history for the 18 years before, it seemed that my last two quarters of my Sr. VP gig were never used in my initial claim. So they were used for the financial determination in my second claim.

That is one of the MOST confusing things about UI to most people. You can be financially eligible without being actually eligible. And you can be actually eligible (fact of termination) without being financially eligible (what happened to your friend).

I find the system confusing and I was a corporate operational accountant for almost two decades and understand the system (from both sides - employee and employer) possibly better than most. And some states are nightmarish to deal with - NJ was awful. PA actually runs their system very well.

[tobee43]

I found in another where your spouse says she's been working part time and now it all makes sense. Working part time allows you (in most states) to claim your UI benefits at a "partial benefit rate" and usually will result in your UI lasting longer as UI is calculated on an amount, not on a time period.

I'll use my case to explain:

Laid off in 8/2008. Received the max available in UI in New Jersey as I was making close to six figures so $550/weekly. They calculate 26 (original amount) weeks X $550 = $14,300 = your "bank", so to speak. Take a part time job in a day care in October of 2008. Allows you to receive partial benefits through this format = $550 weekly X 126% (every state is different on their partial benefit rate) = $693 subtract your part time gross wages (let's say, $280) = $413 for that week.

So instead of pulling $550/weekly, I'm pulling about $400 or so weekly thereby extending the length of time that $14,300 lasted. So I go into Tier I about six weeks later than if I had not worked at all.

Then I'm laid off by said day care. When it comes time to move into Tier II, I have to "test" for a new claim, not my idea but the law. Month 1/2 of fighting with former employer (who is unappreciative of UI filing several months after lay off, but, hey, it was the law); I get completely new claim in PA and start all over at 26 weeks. This is in August, 2009, a full year after my layoff.

Then I work part time again from December, 2009 to June, 2010 and extend my bank further. So a full two years after losing my job, I only just started Tier II.

I don't even tell people that I receive UI benefits anymore because it is SO friggin' complicated and people look at you like, "say what? You lost your job in 2008."

But I'll take it because I look at it the same way you do - my husband and I worked four decades thus far between the two of us and we've worked in states where we contribute to SUI - in fact, I believe we've contributed over $30,000 in SUI premiums at this point. And if I was eligible for a new claim because I took an $11/hour job completely out of my field wiping noses and changing diapers and that resulted in a new claim from being laid off AGAIN, well, then, good for me, I guess.

But to make a long story short, I'm guessing that working part time has extended your EUC timeline in the same way.

yes, that does make sense for "temporary" or "full" part time employees....i know in florida i believe you must work at least 20 weeks straight for the same company...unless they changed that as well...and the only reason i know that is our neighbor got laid off...she was a contract worker for 6 years...well they finally put her "on the books" and 3 weeks later let her go...she applied for unemployment in florida and was told she had to be on the books for 20 weeks straight...but again that's 2nd hand info...

where we came from it was consistence employment ....for a min. amount of weeks...i know all of the states may vary somewhat. although this extension is federal and not state funds...so that's where this gets a bit confusing!

[Ifonly]

I found in another where your spouse says she's been working part time and now it all makes sense. Working part time allows you (in most states) to claim your UI benefits at a "partial benefit rate" and usually will result in your UI lasting longer as UI is calculated on an amount, not on a time period.

I'll use my case to explain:

Laid off in 8/2008. Received the max available in UI in New Jersey as I was making close to six figures so $550/weekly. They calculate 26 (original amount) weeks X $550 = $14,300 = your "bank", so to speak. Take a part time job in a day care in October of 2008. Allows you to receive partial benefits through this format = $550 weekly X 126% (every state is different on their partial benefit rate) = $693 subtract your part time gross wages (let's say, $280) = $413 for that week.

So instead of pulling $550/weekly, I'm pulling about $400 or so weekly thereby extending the length of time that $14,300 lasted. So I go into Tier I about six weeks later than if I had not worked at all.

Then I'm laid off by said day care. When it comes time to move into Tier II, I have to "test" for a new claim, not my idea but the law. Month 1/2 of fighting with former employer (who is unappreciative of UI filing several months after lay off, but, hey, it was the law); I get completely new claim in PA and start all over at 26 weeks. This is in August, 2009, a full year after my layoff.

Then I work part time again from December, 2009 to June, 2010 and extend my bank further. So a full two years after losing my job, I only just started Tier II.

I don't even tell people that I receive UI benefits anymore because it is SO friggin' complicated and people look at you like, "say what? You lost your job in 2008."

But I'll take it because I look at it the same way you do - my husband and I worked four decades thus far between the two of us and we've worked in states where we contribute to SUI - in fact, I believe we've contributed over $30,000 in SUI premiums at this point. And if I was eligible for a new claim because I took an $11/hour job completely out of my field wiping noses and changing diapers and that resulted in a new claim from being laid off AGAIN, well, then, good for me, I guess.

But to make a long story short, I'm guessing that working part time has extended your EUC timeline in the same way.

[tobee43]

I put this in the bk talk rather than general talk on purpose as most on this are here or will soon be here in bk.

The questions we all want to know: Is the UC going to continue?

Mrs. has been on UC since 10/2007. Either there just is no work, she is over-qualified, or too old for employment. Not even is Walmart hiring. So, down to the last day with only a partial week in account, she draws.

First: the account comes up with three year old dates, check disbursed in 07, and next date to file 1/4/2011.

Next: Checking the account today, next to file is 1/11/2011, and new amount and new balance of nine more weeks. She never had to refile, when the account goes to zero, she gets a new balance. The stimulus was stopped but I am not understanding this now three years of pay out.

Of course we desperately need it, but would rather do a days work to earn it. We are not a fool so of course we will as we both have a combined work payment of over 100 years we have paid into the system.

Bottom line: The UC is going on as all have been wondering. 'Hub

well all we know is that we have rec'd at least 5 pieces of mail for the EU office.....first saying to continue to file...then we did and got only one weeks pay...then two days later we rec'd a notice that our filing dates have changed.....and to file on such and such a date..we did that......THEN yesterday we rec'd yet another notice saying that our filing dates are now changing based on the last number of our ss numbers........YIKES!!! ok....so we filed yesterday and ONLY got paid for one week again......what a mess!

however, we just both went into tier 3....just got the first payment....that's all we know at this point....and we were advised we are at the beginning of tier 3 and have but one tier left...."4"......and that would, in fact bring us up to a total of the 99 weeks but NOT beyond.

[platter]

The UC is on a tier system and I think it only goes to a Tier 5?

[AngelinaCatHub]

I put this in the bk talk rather than general talk on purpose as most on this are here or will soon be here in bk.

The questions we all want to know: Is the UC going to continue?

Mrs. has been on UC since 10/2007. Either there just is no work, she is over-qualified, or too old for employment. Not even is Walmart hiring. So, down to the last day with only a partial week in account, she draws.

First: the account comes up with three year old dates, check disbursed in 07, and next date to file 1/4/2011.

Next: Checking the account today, next to file is 1/11/2011, and new amount and new balance of nine more weeks. She never had to refile, when the account goes to zero, she gets a new balance. The stimulus was stopped but I am not understanding this now three years of pay out.

Of course we desperately need it, but would rather do a days work to earn it. We are not a fool so of course we will as we both have a combined work payment of over 100 years we have paid into the system.

Bottom line: The UC is going on as all have been wondering. 'Hub