Let's argue why EI reform is horrible again.

[Boges]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/01/05/pol-employment-insurance-changes-take-effect.html

Under the new regulations, several factors such as type of work, wages, commuting time, working conditions, hours of work, and personal circumstances, will be considered when defining "suitable employment."

In determining these criteria, EI claimants will be placed in one of three categories:

Long-tenured workers: "those who have paid at least 30 per cent of the annual maximum EI premiums for 7 of the past 10 years and who, over the last 5 years, have collected EI regular or fishing benefits for 35 weeks or less."

Frequent claimants: "those who have had three or more claims for EI regular or fishing benefits and have collected benefits for a total of more than 60 weeks in the past 5 years."

Occasional claimants: "all other claimants."

The federal government recently introduced Bill C-44, the Helping Families in Need Act, to give parents who receive EI parental benefits access to sickness benefits and create a new EI benefit for parents of critically ill children.

So this isn't about attacking people who get laid off and are trying to find work in their field. It's about targeting people who work the minimum required hours to claim EI then take the rest of the year off.

[eyeball]

How come we never target employers? It doesn't seem right that people who only employ workers for a short period of time can lay back and let society maintain their workforce so it's ready and waiting for them when they decide to go back to work.

[TimG]

How come we never target employers? It doesn't seem right that people who only employ workers for a short period of time can lay back and let society maintain their workforce so it's ready and waiting for them when they decide to go back to work.

EI for seasonal workers is effectively a subsidy for these types of corporations. if EI is cut back for seasonal workers then these companies will need to spend more to maintain their workforce. Some companies may likely close but you are are always against corporate subsidies so you should be happy.

[eyeball]

Anyone familiar with the term in-kind contribution?

It usually describes a dollar figure that's placed on the value of donated labour or materials that contribute to a common goal or project. Our society could be described this way and a dollar figure can be placed on the time volunteers contribute to it, it was $21.90 in 2011 according to these folks.

I fail to see why society should expect and demand that people earn every dollar they spend themselves on their own and then lay back while volunteers contribute literally billions of dollars to it's well being with no more than a thank you.

People who have been laid off should still be able to earn their keep as there is clearly no shortage of work given the demand for volunteers.

[eyeball]

What about cutting the subsidy that society gets in the form of unpaid labour?

It's like a righteous form of slavery in contrast to the moral imperative society places on individuals to produce and account for every dollar they spend with a unit of time spent earning it.

It seems unconscionable.

[Boges]

So you think those people that volunteer for their church or community organization are unconscionable?

[eyeball]

No I think it's unconscionable that society should benefit from unpaid labour while demanding that everyone account for every dollar they spend with a unit of time worked.

[westguy]

as a taxpayer, I am i facor of the reforms to EI. Hopefully, it will reduce the abuse

[westguy]

oops that's favor

[CPCFTW]

Anyone familiar with the term in-kind contribution?

It usually describes a dollar figure that's placed on the value of donated labour or materials that contribute to a common goal or project. Our society could be described this way and a dollar figure can be placed on the time volunteers contribute to it, it was $21.90 in 2011 according to these folks.

I fail to see why society should expect and demand that people earn every dollar they spend themselves on their own and then lay back while volunteers contribute literally billions of dollars to it's well being with no more than a thank you.

People who have been laid off should still be able to earn their keep as there is clearly no shortage of work given the demand for volunteers.

lol what is this nonsense.

[eyeball]

It's English.

[Moonbox]

I fail to see why society should expect and demand that people earn every dollar they spend themselves on their own and then lay back while volunteers contribute literally billions of dollars to it's well being with no more than a thank you.

People who have been laid off should still be able to earn their keep as there is clearly no shortage of work given the demand for volunteers.

WOW! That's one of the most hilarious things I've read here in a long time. Anyone with a shred of common sense could see why this wouldn't work. Ignoring the fact that volunteer work ceases to be volunteer work if people are getting paid for it, did you give this any sort of rational thought before you posted it? Did you consider that there is a demand for volunteers because volunteers don't get paid? Follow that train of thought and see if you can come to the only possible conclusion....

I'm worried about you man.

[eyeball]

Did you consider that there is a demand for volunteers because volunteers don't get paid? Follow that train of thought and see if you can come to the only possible conclusion....

There's not enough money in the economy to meet everyone's need.

But there's no shortage of work. Funny dat.

I'm worried about you man.

I'm worried about all of us.

Edited January 9, 2013 by eyeball

[Moonbox]

There's not enough money in the economy to meet everyone's need.

But there's no shortage of work. Funny dat.

Volunteer work =/ Employment. Sorry to bust your bubble. You volunteer your time for a cause or service you believe in, and if your causes and beliefs aren't supported by the market then you don't get paid. I would spend my whole day walking dogs and puppies at the Humane Society if someone paiid me a salary to do it. I love dogs. I don't particularly love finance.

[eyeball]

Actually what I said was volunteer work could justify a pogy cheque for a seasonally laid off worker. The money is already there, EI is a self sustaining program, it just needs to be justified to quell the moral outrage of people who cannot abide the perception that anyone might be getting something for nothing.

As for the nature of that work, I was thinking something more environmental. Take fishermen for example, there are thousands of km of salmon bearing streams and wetlands that need restoring after decades of development and degradation. Consider also, the hundreds of thousands of tons of tsunami debris, including a lot of plastic are washing ashore along on the coast that needs to be cleaned up. Environmental work of the two examples I just gave is hard, dirty and sometimes dangerous work, I know, I've done my share of both. To really do these justice they require a dedicated workforce to deal with but society seems to expect something for nothing and that volunteers should pick up the slack.

Parks Canada just laid off 30 workers in my region then turned around and asked for volunteers to try and deal with tsunami debris washing up in their parks. They got two.

Edited January 9, 2013 by eyeball

[westguy]

I thought that EI was intended to help those who had TEMPORARILY lost employment while they sought other jobs, not to help those who chose to work the minimum number of hours to be eligible for EI

[Moonbox]

To really do these justice they require a dedicated workforce to deal with but society seems to expect something for nothing and that volunteers should pick up the slack.

Parks Canada just laid off 30 workers in my region then turned around and asked for volunteers to try and deal with tsunami debris washing up in their parks. They got two.

Sad story. That's what happens when the government tries to trim the budget. Garbage picking isn't hard work. Anyone can do it. It's boring and it's manual labour, but it's definitely an expendable job!

The government could, if it wanted to, create jobs for every single Canadian who wanted to work for them. Most of these jobs would be a waste of money and would add very little to the economy, but that never seems to be an issue for you!

[eyeball]

No, I guess there's no link between the economy and the environment worth considering is there? The economy is just one more thing society expects to get for nothing.

[Moonbox]

Okay so we've transformed this into an environmental debate now?

If you want the garbage picked up, take the people on welfare and put them to work doing it as a condition of welfare benefits. Maybe increase their welfare benefits. $20/hr to pick up garbage though? Nope.

[eyeball]

Okay so we've transformed this into an environmental debate now?

As opposed to walking dogs? Okay. That said, I pretty much refuse to exclude the environment in any discussion that includes economic policy because you can't have a healthy functional economy without a healthy functional environment - this is especially true for seasonal renewable resource workers, like fishermen. I realize that under the prevailing economic paradigm that the environment is an externality, outside the economy in other words, but that frankly, is a deluded dangerously outdated approach to viewing the world. It's puzzling that people who normally get so bent out of shape over getting something for nothing, don't get that.

If you want the garbage picked up, take the people on welfare and put them to work doing it as a condition of welfare benefits. Maybe increase their welfare benefits. $20/hr to pick up garbage though? Nope.

Get your dog walkers to pick it up. This is not about aesthetics or cleaning streets, what I'm talking about is restoring the value of the natural capital that underwrites so much of our economy. I think there's also little doubt that our social capital is as thin and frayed around the edges as many our ecosystems these days and I suspect a decent living wage would be a good remedy for that. I suppose it's fair to say that terms like natural and social capital also befuddle, outrage and amuse .

I want a debate about protecting and even enhancing seasonal EI by linking it directly to the stewardship, enhancement and restoration of the natural ecosystems that so much of our economy depend upon. This really is a bigger picture issue and as part of that debate I think we also need to include doing something i.e. toning down if not completely ignoring, the hard moral edge that certain people seem to insist on injecting into any discussion about welfare or unemployment - the suggestion this all be a condition of welfare instead of a valid and valuable in-kind contribution to the betterment of our world and everyone's live's is an example of what I'm talking about.

Edited January 10, 2013 by eyeball

[punked]

Why raise how much I have to pay to EI while making it harder to get? Oh yah because it is a back door tax increase. I expect every Conservative around to be against it yet they love the tax increase.

[Boges]

EI is insurance.

Auto insurance premiums go up up because of fraud. Try getting insurance in the City of Brampton.

I would consider someone who only works the minimum required hours they need to claim EI, then taking the rest of the year off as committing fraud.

These changes are meant to stamp that out.

[punked]

EI is insurance.

Auto insurance premiums go up up because of fraud. Try getting insurance in the City of Brampton.

I would consider someone who only works the minimum required hours they need to claim EI, then taking the rest of the year off as committing fraud.

These changes are meant to stamp that out.

It doesn't matter because the government puts the revenue in the general funds and spends it. Ei had a 50 billion dollar surplus so how about you get it together.

Edited January 10, 2013 by punked

[Moonbox]

*Yawn*

Let's add the environment into the debate over pension reform too, or education, crime prevention and the military while we're at it too.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Moonbox

[CPCFTW]

As opposed to walking dogs? Okay. That said, I pretty much refuse to exclude the environment in any discussion that includes economic policy because you can't have a healthy functional economy without a healthy functional environment - this is especially true for seasonal renewable resource workers, like fishermen. I realize that under the prevailing economic paradigm that the environment is an externality, outside the economy in other words, but that frankly, is a deluded dangerously outdated approach to viewing the world. It's puzzling that people who normally get so bent out of shape over getting something for nothing, don't get that.

Get your dog walkers to pick it up. This is not about aesthetics or cleaning streets, what I'm talking about is restoring the value of the natural capital that underwrites so much of our economy. I think there's also little doubt that our social capital is as thin and frayed around the edges as many our ecosystems these days and I suspect a decent living wage would be a good remedy for that. I suppose it's fair to say that terms like natural and social capital also befuddle, outrage and amuse .

I want a debate about protecting and even enhancing seasonal EI by linking it directly to the stewardship, enhancement and restoration of the natural ecosystems that so much of our economy depend upon. This really is a bigger picture issue and as part of that debate I think we also need to include doing something i.e. toning down if not completely ignoring, the hard moral edge that certain people seem to insist on injecting into any discussion about welfare or unemployment - the suggestion this all be a condition of welfare instead of a valid and valuable in-kind contribution to the betterment of our world and everyone's live's is an example of what I'm talking about.

I would say amuse is the most likely..

I'm just as confused as Moonbox in terms of how this relates to EI.. Seems like you just used this thread to vent that society doesn't value the ecosystem as much as you'd like.