Kenney says you can't get EI if you turndown work.

[punked]

the Klein conservative solution was to make very simple rules for welfare eligibility: if you are single and employable, get a job because you will not get welfare. Period. It cut the unemployed youth bumming on the street drastically, because they inevitably get hungry enough to work .

Here comes the old Cut like Alberta did argument. Let me tell you a dirty little secret no one else will tell you even after Cut Cut Klein come in Alberta was still spending more then everyone else per capita. I know it bursts your Conservative bubble but what can I say.

[fellowtraveller]

Not true.... it was simply a shift of burdens from Alberta to B.C. Alberta also gave free one-way bus tickets out of the Province. Again, all that did was shift the burden to other parts of Canada.

Klein didn't "solve" anything whatsoever.

Sure he did, he solved one element the culture of entitlement to welfare in his province, which freed funds for those who needed them- needy people with dependents. If employable welfare recipients chose to move to a place where they could sucker somebody else, tough shit for them. A bus ticket is a cheap way to solve what is in fact not a shift of compassion, but a parasitic condition. if you are a resident of BC, thanks and good luck with the shiftless.

At the same time they trimmed the welfare rolls, those remaining on them got a whole lot of daycare support and job training so they could ultinmately get decent jobs. A bunch more were moved onto AISH, which is where they belonged in the first place in a compassionate saociety that is fair to all.

Now you can explain why employable single people in BC deserve welfare payments.

I'll make some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Edited April 23, 2012 by fellowtraveller

[fellowtraveller]

Alberta was still spending more then everyone else per capita

Not for welfare.

Of course, us rednecks have always spent plenty on commie programs like health and education.

[fellowtraveller]

which province is thinking of shipping welfare recipients to work camps?

Hint: not AB.

[punked]

which province is thinking of shipping welfare recipients to work camps?

Hint: not AB.

Maybe because St. Ralph sent all of Alberta's welfare cases to BC.

At this time I will again point out EI IS NOT WELFARE! It is insurance people pay into.

Edited April 23, 2012 by punked

[cybercoma]

Again those Youths you see on the street aren't getting EI. EI is only for those who have paid into it and end up out of a job. It is to hold you over until you can find equivalent work. You think EI and welfare are the same thing which is typical of your type. News Flash they aren't.

Wait until you tell him that there are different kinds of social assistance and different kinds of EI. That should blow his mind.

[Wilber]

In principle I think EI is a good thing, but. I've moved from one end of the country to the other and gone offshore twice to stay employed. There are always exceptions but in general, I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who think a job should come to them.

[eyeball]

In principle I think EI is a good thing, but. I've moved from one end of the country to the other and gone offshore twice to stay employed. There are always exceptions but in general, I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who think a job should come to them.

Interesting final comment. In my region we depend on distant government managers creating access to local natural resources and it is from this access that jobs are created. That access is a very fickle thing and all too often the processes that make it happen are completely out of the hands of local people. The jobs are already here but you wouldn't know it.

A case or two in point...

Lately we seen even more concentration of fishing quota's into fewer hands away from small local boats and onto offshore factory ships from far away resulting in even more unemployment for people who live right here. It's not much different in the forest industry judging by the freighter loads of whole logs being shipped out and local sawmills shutting down. So the jobs are swimming around right here in local waters and growing right here in local forests but you wouldn't know it, unless you lived where they're being shipped to which is almost entirely outside of Canada.

As for relocating or waiting for "jobs" to come here the downturn in the number of tourists leaves me wondering what there is to relocate to. Just as small resource communities are to the economy as canaries are to a coal mine, tourists are an indication of what the economic environment outside our region is like. I would have thought by now we'd see the number of tourists increase from wherever it is our old jobs are being shipped to but so far there's still nada. That tells me they're probably being screwed over too.

Edited April 24, 2012 by eyeball

[fellowtraveller]

Maybe because St. Ralph sent all of Alberta's welfare cases to BC.

At this time I will again point out EI IS NOT WELFARE! It is insurance people pay into.

have you given up with your contention that Alberta has high rates of welfare recipients or shall I demolish that argument with stats?

[fellowtraveller]

Again those Youths you see on the street aren't getting EI.

They don't get welfare in Alberta either. Here is where you make your case that they should.

[Army Guy]

If you ever did get layed off you could collect EI. THat's how an insurance program works! If you crashed your car, you collect insurance.

Just because you never collected, doesn't mean you didn't benefit. You benefited by having that security just in case...

Ok i'll run through it one more time, tommorrow if the military decided we were not required any more, i could not collect EI as i was going to recieve a pension....So it does not benifit me, nor is it security as i can't collect it....that goes for any government employee that will get a pension.....

My Pay dept told me if i wanted to collect EI , i could apply for another job, work the weeks required then apply ...sounds like security to me...and sounds like my old insurence company that would'nt pay out....

[TimG]

i could not collect EI as i was going to recieve a pension.

Then you may be eligible for a refund of premiums. This happens to people who run small businesses. They deduct EI but find out later they were never eligible because they were management.

[fellowtraveller]

Then you may be eligible for a refund of premiums. This happens to people who run small businesses. They deduct EI but find out later they were never eligible because they were management.

More common are the family members who work in small family businesses, then find out that although they are just regular hourly employees they are not eligible for EI either.

[Jack Weber]

More common are the family members who work in small family businesses, then find out that although they are just regular hourly employees they are not eligible for EI either.

I do think that's unfair...

[TimG]

I do think that's unfair...

You think preventing people who own businesses from scamming EI by employing and then laying off their family is unfair?

[Wilber]

Interesting final comment. In my region we depend on distant government managers creating access to local natural resources and it is from this access that jobs are created. That access is a very fickle thing and all too often the processes that make it happen are completely out of the hands of local people. The jobs are already here but you wouldn't know it.

A case or two in point...

Lately we seen even more concentration of fishing quota's into fewer hands away from small local boats and onto offshore factory ships from far away resulting in even more unemployment for people who live right here. It's not much different in the forest industry judging by the freighter loads of whole logs being shipped out and local sawmills shutting down. So the jobs are swimming around right here in local waters and growing right here in local forests but you wouldn't know it, unless you lived where they're being shipped to which is almost entirely outside of Canada.

As for relocating or waiting for "jobs" to come here the downturn in the number of tourists leaves me wondering what there is to relocate to. Just as small resource communities are to the economy as canaries are to a coal mine, tourists are an indication of what the economic environment outside our region is like. I would have thought by now we'd see the number of tourists increase from wherever it is our old jobs are being shipped to but so far there's still nada. That tells me they're probably being screwed over too.

I'm not trying to be an apologist for any government's policies. Political activism is fine but you still have to pay the bills.

My point is, regardless of the reasons, eventually you have to do something proactive if there are no opportunities where you are. A person can't expect someone else to support them indefinitely just because they don't want to move somewhere they don't like as much. I'm certainly not trying to say that everyone is in a position where that is easily done or even possible but if they can, they should.

[eyeball]

I'm not trying to be an apologist for any government's policies. Political activism is fine but you still have to pay the bills.

My point is, regardless of the reasons, eventually you have to do something proactive if there are no opportunities where you are. A person can't expect someone else to support them indefinitely just because they don't want to move somewhere they don't like as much. I'm certainly not trying to say that everyone is in a position where that is easily done or even possible but if they can, they should.

I think you're right about being more proactive but I think the new expectation is that you look the other way when people go about doing whatever they need to do to pay their bills.

[Tilter]

Kenney says you can't get EI if you turndown work

Boy --- Now the government is interfering with our 6 month winter vacations ---- DICTATORSHIP :ph34r:

[Smallc]

You know what? Two years ago, I quit a 50K a year job because I hated it. I had to work for minimum wage, a few days a week in the meantime. Now I have another good paying job. Sometimes, people have to do things that they don't want to.

[Jack Weber]

You think preventing people who own businesses from scamming EI by employing and then laying off their family is unfair?

I think the situation that fellowtraveller put forward is unfair...

Sorry if that bothers you...

[Jack Weber]

You know what? Two years ago, I quit a 50K a year job because I hated it. I had to work for minimum wage, a few days a week in the meantime. Now I have another good paying job. Sometimes, people have to do things that they don't want to.

Were you living at home at the time?

Edited April 25, 2012 by Jack Weber

[punked]

You know what? Two years ago, I quit a 50K a year job because I hated it. I had to work for minimum wage, a few days a week in the meantime. Now I have another good paying job. Sometimes, people have to do things that they don't want to.

That really isn't the issue. The issues is getting becoming underemployed then being caught in that underemployed for years. If we didn't want to EI we could go that route, but why have it if you it wont help you when you lose a job. What the government is doing is looking to make EI hard to get so they can use as a tax as they have in the past. THAT IS WRONG.

[eyeball]

You know what? Two years ago, I quit a 50K a year job because I hated it. I had to work for minimum wage, a few days a week in the meantime. Now I have another good paying job. Sometimes, people have to do things that they don't want to.

I know hundreds of people who were forced out of jobs that they loved and now they have to bear the ignominy of watching those jobs being given to other people - by people who similarly sneer down their self righteous noses and proclaim that the dispossessed just get with the poogram.

[Boges]

BUMP!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ei-reform-set-to-redefine-suitable-work-for-job-seekers/article2432675/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Politics&utm_content=2432675

The Conservative government is giving its clearest signal yet that a hard line is coming on employment insurance, with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty saying to expect tougher rules on the type of work Canadians must consider while job-hunting on EI.

“There’ll be a broader definition and people will have to engage more in the work force,” said Mr. Flaherty, who then pointed to his own résumé from his student days at Toronto’s Osgoode Hall Law School. “I was brought up in a certain way. There is no bad job. The only bad job is not having a job.

Apparently this is specifically an east coast problem where EI is a part of their culture. You couldn't game this system like that in the GTA.

[Guest Peeves]

More (work) or less ($).

Now I've never been without a job. Had a few I didn't like to pay for survival. Had a few that paid bupkis, but I found the best way to find a job was to work even if only for a token wage and commission. I never had much use for those that just sat around and drew EI or welfare when some jobs were going begging. I know there are those that can't do some types of work for some reason, but there are jobs they likely can do with some support and those healthy parasites need to be off the dole one way or another.

More at link.

Under the Employment Act, as currently written, someone can be disqualified from receiving benefits if they have “not applied for a suitable employment that is vacant.” Not suitable work is defined as ” either at a lower rate of earnings or on conditions less favourable” than would be expected from a good employer, or if the job is “is not in the claimant’s usual occupation and is either at a lower rate of earnings or on conditions less favourable than … the conditions that the claimant usually obtained.”

In other words, if you lose your job, you don’t need to take any job to make ends meet. You can hold out for a job as good or better as the one you previously had, or even pass on equally well-paying work if it isn’t what you would prefer to be doing. The Tories intend to change that. ““There’ll be a broader definition and people will have to engage more in the work force,” said Mr. Flaherty. “I was brought up in a certain way. There is no bad job. The only bad job is not having a job.”

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/15/matt-gurney-canadians-who-wont-work-shouldnt-get-ei/

Edited May 15, 2012 by Peeves