NEW EI rules

[Topaz]

It seems to me that the Tories are going after the seasonal workers more than any one else with the new rules. Depending at one's location that may not be fair, after all, what is there to do in the Martimes in the winter or the farm? Could be that the government is starting to see more people drawing from EI than putting in and that would take away from their revenues? These new rules could create a really mess for the people, both the people giving the EI out and the people who are hoping to get it. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/ei-rules-takes-aim-frequent-users-force-workers-144639800.html

[Canuckistani]

It seems to me that the Tories are going after the seasonal workers more than any one else with the new rules. Depending at one's location that may not be fair, after all, what is there to do in the Martimes in the winter or the farm? Could be that the government is starting to see more people drawing from EI than putting in and that would take away from their revenues? These new rules could create a really mess for the people, both the people giving the EI out and the people who are hoping to get it. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/ei-rules-takes-aim-frequent-users-force-workers-144639800.html

I don't think their rules will accomplish much. At the same time, for a seasonal worker in Atlantic Canada, I don't think they will be impacted much either. Once their seasonal work ends, there won't be jobs just waiting for them instead of EI. If there are, then they should be forced to take those jobs, I agree with that.

The having to take a job further away could cause real hardship. People without cars and good transit options would be hooped.

Better would be for the govt to put money into matching employees and employers, assisting with re lo expenses and greatly expanding our training system so we create the skilled workers we need in Canada instead of always importing them while Canadians are underemployed.

[punked]

Just going to point out the Liberals couldn't even bother to make it to the presser. Shows you who's side those guys are on. Just another Conservative party.

[Boges]

Just going to point out the Liberals couldn't even bother to make it to the presser. Shows you who's side those guys are on. Just another Conservative party.

I remember you complaining that these new rules would force IT workers to cut Christmas trees or something like that.

That doesn't appear to be the case. If you're a first time user of EI you can take wait for a job in your field that pays as low as 90% of what you earned before.

Now if you're a repeat user of EI you can be forced to take different work as low as 70% of what you made before.

This doesn't sound draconian at all. If you're a seasonal worker, you're a bum if you're just collecting EI on your down time.

[Canuckistani]

This doesn't sound draconian at all. If you're a seasonal worker, you're a bum if you're just collecting EI on your down time.

A seasonal worker in PEI - what job are they going to take in their off season, or what full time job is available to them? I don't think there are many available for them there.

[punked]

I remember you complaining that these new rules would force IT workers to cut Christmas trees or something like that.

That doesn't appear to be the case. If you're a first time user of EI you can take wait for a job in your field that pays as low as 90% of what you earned before.

Now if you're a repeat user of EI you can be forced to take different work as low as 70% of what you made before.

This doesn't sound draconian at all. If you're a seasonal worker, you're a bum if you're just collecting EI on your down time.

For how many weeks is it 90% of what you earned? These rules may very well force IT workers into the Christmas tree farms. You better go back and look at the rules. Don't worry though because the government fired everyone at service Canada so they will never be able to enforce them. The are just for you, to help you feel the government is listening to you.

70% of what you earned will force people into poverty. If I earn 30,000 a year 70% of that is 21,000. This is to depress wages so companies can walk away with more money. Heck you want a raise? How about instead I lay you off then offer you the same job at 90% don't want it? Have fun with no EI. Welcome to the new Canada

[Canuckistani]

For how many weeks is it 90% of what you earned? These rules may very well force IT workers into the Christmas tree farms. You better go back and look at the rules. Don't worry though because the government fired everyone at service Canada so they will never be able to enforce them. The are just for you, to help you feel the government is listening to you.

70% of what you earned will force people into poverty. If I earn 30,000 a year 70% of that is 21,000. This is to depress wages so companies can walk away with more money. Heck you want a raise? How about instead I lay you off then offer you the same job at 90% don't want it? Have fun with no EI. Welcome to the new Canada

What you say seems a bit extreme. The scenario you describe could have been just as possible before any rule changes. Not something I've ever heard about.

[Boges]

70% of what you earned will force people into poverty. If I earn 30,000 a year 70% of that is 21,000. This is to depress wages so companies can walk away with more money. Heck you want a raise? How about instead I lay you off then offer you the same job at 90% don't want it? Have fun with no EI. Welcome to the new Canada

Only if you're a perpetual user of EI will you be forced to take one of those jobs.

EI isn't even 70% of your salary is it? You'd be better off taking a job at 70% of your salary than going on EI anyway.

I'm guessing what happens is people work for x amount of weeks and can live of EI for the rest of the year. Of course in Ontario you wouldn't get away with this because it's a "high-employment" area.

[punked]

Only if you're a perpetual user of EI will you be forced to take one of those jobs.

EI isn't even 70% of your salary is it? You'd be better off taking a job at 70% of your salary than going on EI anyway.

I'm guessing what happens is people work for x amount of weeks and can live of EI for the rest of the year. Of course in Ontario you wouldn't get away with this because it's a "high-employment" area.

EI is to give you time to look for work that provides you the same salary as you had before you layoff.

[Boges]

EI is to give you time to look for work that provides you the same salary as you had before you layoff.

Clearly not if you're a seasonal worker.

[Boges]

What you say seems a bit extreme. The scenario you describe could have been just as possible before any rule changes. Not something I've ever heard about.

If an employer wants employees to take a pay cut he/she doesn't need to consult EI rules to make that decision. So yeah that example is a red herring.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Boges

[Topaz]

There's also those jobs were workers get laid off because of a down turn but will be recalled sometime down the road. So those workers have to prove they are looking for work but the problem is, no company will hire these people because they know the worker will return to their old job. This also could go for the seasonal workers, so is the government going to make companies hire these workers anyway? This is going to be a mess and it was pointed out that when this has been tried in the past the seating government has been voted OUT!

[Boges]

There's also those jobs were workers get laid off because of a down turn but will be recalled sometime down the road. So those workers have to prove they are looking for work but the problem is, no company will hire these people because they know the worker will return to their old job. This also could go for the seasonal workers, so is the government going to make companies hire these workers anyway? This is going to be a mess and it was pointed out that when this has been tried in the past the seating government has been voted OUT!

When has it been tried in the past? And which governments fell because of it?

The temporary layoff question is a tough one. But that doesn't change that seasonal workers are scamming the system. If students can get summer jobs, seasonal workers can get jobs in the off time.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

It seems to me that the Tories are going after the seasonal workers more than any one else with the new rules. Depending at one's location that may not be fair, after all, what is there to do in the Martimes in the winter or the farm? Could be that the government is starting to see more people drawing from EI than putting in and that would take away from their revenues? These new rules could create a really mess for the people, both the people giving the EI out and the people who are hoping to get it. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/ei-rules-takes-aim-frequent-users-force-workers-144639800.html

I disagree with forcing everyone to take a lower paying job in a different field, their changes at least somewhat address that concern.

I think it makes sense to limit those with purposeful and systematic unemployment from able to collect.

[punked]

Let's not forget the bigger problem. All the power to EI will now be in the hands of one person. She could wake tomorrow and say "No one will qualify for EI" and that will be the case. Not a good idea in a democracy.

[Boges]

Let's not forget the bigger problem. All the power to EI will now be in the hands of one person. She could wake tomorrow and say "No one will qualify for EI" and that will be the case. Not a good idea in a democracy.

Who Diane Finley?

[Topaz]

Who Diane Finley?

Let's see, she's a MP making around 150,000 or more, married to a corrupt senator making not as much as his wife but they will be collecting huge pensions from the people they have taken away OAS, GIS and EI. Oh, after 2017, no very little money coming from the fed for health care.

[TheNewTeddy]

Stephen Harper: Empowering Women!

[Topaz]

When has it been tried in the past? And which governments fell because of it?

The temporary layoff question is a tough one. But that doesn't change that seasonal workers are scamming the system. If students can get summer jobs, seasonal workers can get jobs in the off time.

I think this all depends on were you live and I think that young people unemployment is up and they are having trouble finding work too. I still think its WHO you know when it comes to finding a job.

[jacee]

I'm curious what employers think about the new rules.

For seasonal employers, if their workers can collect EI in the off season then it means they can hire back the same people each year - already trained and reliable. They might have more staff turnover with the new rules.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I'm curious what employers think about the new rules.

For seasonal employers, if their workers can collect EI in the off season then it means they can hire back the same people each year - already trained and reliable. They might have more staff turnover with the new rules.

Then that's their fault for not paying the workers enough during the work season to stay around for it

[madmax]

Another money grab for the Federal Coffers.

[Topaz]

It seem this is another way the Feds are downloading on to the provinces. IF workers, especially seasonal workers can't find work and many won't then its welfare. Which bring me to another topic about the feds have said about OAS. They have said that for those two years, 65-67, they will give the provinces the money to cover the people going on welfare. Well, if they are going to give the money for welfare, why not give the people the OAS money, what's the difference? They won't be saving any money.

[PIK]

About time. Never like the idea my buddies making more money then me in their 8 months of work and then take the winter off and get paid to ice fish, while I work all year round.

[Smallc]

IF workers, especially seasonal workers can't find work and many won't then its welfare.

Ummm, no, if they can't find work, then it's EI. The point of this is to ensure that they actually try to find work.