Knock Knock guess who?

[Topaz]

If you are one of the many Canadians on EI, you may be one of the 1200 that willl get a knock at your door, checking up on your quest to find another job. Most of these 1200 are probably seasonal workers and they live where finding a job is very difficult to find. These workers do pay into EI and I don't think its right of the gov't to start stalking the unemployed. I , also want to know what`s the cost of checking up on these people? This usually done for welfare people not EI. Thoughts? http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/21/pol-cp-employment-insurance-house-calls.html

[Boges]

If you are one of the many Canadians on EI, you may be one of the 1200 that willl get a knock at your door, checking up on your quest to find another job. Most of these 1200 are probably seasonal workers and they live where finding a job is very difficult to find. These workers do pay into EI and I don't think its right of the gov't to start stalking the unemployed. I , also want to know what`s the cost of checking up on these people? This usually done for welfare people not EI. Thoughts? http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/21/pol-cp-employment-insurance-house-calls.html

Well I'll assume they're not hiring new civil servants to do this, If they are there would have to be a cost benefit analysis.

I grow tired of the argument "We pay into EI, so we have a right to make a claim every year".

EI should be used for permanent unemployment, not seasonal workers.

[shortlived]

EI should be a rock solid insurance program that private companies can offer in place of the government program competing with it.

The government meddling in this program people have paid into for years and years to suit their current needs is just abuse.

people should have entitlements locked in like an insurance annuity if they don't draw on it, while people who use it should see their premium increase.

As for knocking on doors, poverty programs should just pay the money out, and kill the beaurocracy for cost savings, as the fraud amounts will likely cost less that employing people to find frauds. Lets just see how much money this saves.. oh and send people to prison? thats not cheap either. It is just government stupidity.

Government shouldn't be able to 1. force payment for a program that you don't have access to. 2. stipulate how you can go about seeking employment and what jobs you can work.

It is total BS,

This is suppose to be a free country yet they are forcing you to pay into a program you can't access, total scam. If it had a supplimental annuity on retirement age it would be fair.. but as is it is just a scam.

Edited February 21, 2013 by shortlived

[jacee]

If you are one of the many Canadians on EI, you may be one of the 1200 that willl get a knock at your door, checking up on your quest to find another job. Most of these 1200 are probably seasonal workers and they live where finding a job is very difficult to find. These workers do pay into EI and I don't think its right of the gov't to start stalking the unemployed. I , also want to know what`s the cost of checking up on these people? This usually done for welfare people not EI. Thoughts? http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/21/pol-cp-employment-insurance-house-calls.html

QUOTAS ?!?!

Earlier this month, HRSD confirmed to CBC News that it has set national and regional EI enforcement targets, putting a dollar value on the quantity of improper payments it hopes to track down.

Nationally, the department has a target of $430 million for what it calls "integrity work." The biggest target for a single region is Quebec, where the department expects to gain $120 million by investigating claims, then declaring them ineligible.

I WONDER HOW MANY TORY RIDINGS ARE BEING TARGETED!!!

I think we'd better see the 'knock knock' itineraries to see whether these 'integrity visits' are POLITICALLY targeted.

Edited February 21, 2013 by jacee

[Muddy]

No one should be forced to pay EI. My wife had to pay EI for years but was unable to collect it because her husband owned the business she worked at.

Now hows that for a shake down. Just like a protection racket.A lot of seasonal workers from what I have observed collect EI in the off season and work under the table the rest of the year.

I have gone into the EI office looking for workers. In the off season. You know like late fall and winter. I was treated like a theif in the night and had to jump through hoops. After my third try at the paper work I packed it in. They actually knowingly gave me out dated paper work to fill out. I came to the conclusion that they really did not have anyone looking for work. I also think the staff had to take grumpy pills each morning.

[jacee]

I have gone into the EI office looking for workers. In the off season. You know like late fall and winter. I was treated like a theif in the night and had to jump through hoops. After my third try at the paper work I packed it in. They actually knowingly gave me out dated paper work to fill out. I came to the conclusion that they really did not have anyone looking for work. I also think the staff had to take grumpy pills each morning.

EI is not an employment service.

As far as I know, we don't have one anymore.

Whatever happened to Canada Manpower?

Edited February 21, 2013 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

No one should be forced to pay EI. My wife had to pay EI for years but was unable to collect it because her husband owned the business she worked at.

You can make her EI exempt. I've had a couple of situations like this where we employed family and that's what we did. If you don't feel comfortable with the process you can call Grants International

[Pliny]

No one should be forced to pay EI. My wife had to pay EI for years but was unable to collect it because her husband owned the business she worked at.

Yep. She should get it all back.

[Peanutbutter]

Yep. She should get it all back.

By those standards then people who maybe shall never go on social service welfare should get that portion of their taxes back as well, right?

Why stop there. What about who will never dial 9-1-1? Who take garbage to the dump themselves? To name a couple.

We live in a social society so unless we're prepared to live in a banana republic and pay no taxes these are the rules. We pay so others can use the services and it's the mark of a civil society.

[jacee]

EI should be a rock solid insurance program that private companies can offer in place of the government program competing with it.

The government meddling in this program people have paid into for years and years to suit their current needs is just abuse.

I agree. EI is self-sustaining and a few years back had a huge surplus that Paul Martin STOLE.

It should be entirely independent of government, and I'll bet premiums will go down.

This has absolutely nothing to do with saving taxpayer money. There is no taxpayer money in EI, just employee and employer contributions.

But I'll bet Harper wants to cut people off and create a surplus so he can steal it just like Martin did.

And feed western hatred of 'easterners' at the same time.

[TimG]

I agree. EI is self-sustaining and a few years back had a huge surplus that Paul Martin STOLE.

Martin stole nothing. EI is not "insurance". It is a government transfer program - EI deductions are nothing but a job killing form of income tax.

[shortlived]

EI is not an employment service.

As far as I know, we don't have one anymore.

Whatever happened to Canada Manpower?

http://jest-orae.psc-cfp.gc.ca/JEST-ORAE/qcksrch.do?lang=en

They also have job services for those listed in their database.

However, even with departmental cuts there is still hiring going on...?

This is what gets me a bit they are paying out to people when there are government jobs available... train en up and ship em out.

Now they can complain that you didn't get a job as a door knocker. Cause you know they are hiring.

$24 an hour for serving food ain't a bad deal though... better than most fast food joints pay.

What are they using a carpenter for?

This one is funny consider clement of Parry Sound's riding closure of vancouver station

Carpenter Canadian Coast Guard (an Agency of Fisheries and Oceans Canada) Parry Sound, Prescott $25.81 per hour

Floating gazebos?

This one looks a little strange too..

Manager, Pension Policy and Administration Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Ottawa Salary: N/A Edited February 22, 2013 by shortlived

[Peanutbutter]

I see nothing wrong with home visits becoming part of the EI workers responsibilities. I'm sure a lot of people aren't actively looking for work and are just waiting for their benefits to nearly run out in order to start looking for work.

I also think that seasonal workers who are going back to their jobs should be exempt from looking for further work.

if we can cut off some people who aren't doing their part then all the better.

EI is insurance and it should be run like an insurance company and insurance companies do there best to make sure they aren't being cheated.

I say hooray!

[Topaz]

What I got me the most was today on CTV, the debate of this on the political show, the Tory MP said there are rules and every Canadians has to follow them and I'm thinking ...what, just look at the party you belong to....your party don't follow the rules, just your own over and over again. IF ALL Canadians have to pay into EI then ALL Canadians should be able to draw from it no matter what, as long as they have the probably hours required. If the government doesn't like the seasonal workers, espeically out in the Martimes, then let those people opt out of paying. Can't wait for the next election and I wonder how much money will go out of the Treasury to buy the election again?

[Mighty AC]

EI is an insurance policy not a bank account. Some policing has to be done to minimize corruption.

[jacee]

Martin stole nothing. EI is not "insurance". It is a government transfer program - EI deductions are nothing but a job killing form of income tax.

Maybe Harper took the $54b ei surplus? ...

Money money who's got the ei money?

They call ei benefits 'transfer to persons',

but ei revenues cover it:

Your tax dollar:

Employment Insurance benefits (7 cents)

...

Employment Insurance premiums contributed $17.5 billion to federal revenues [1] , or close to 7 cents of every dollar in revenues.

It's a shell game. Ei doesn't cost taxpayer dollars.

It's a self-sustaining insurance program.

Edited February 22, 2013 by jacee

[Signals.Cpl]

So we are back at this? How is there anything even remotely fair about many people paying in to a benefit they will likely never see only to have few people use said benefit year after year? What about workers who pay in to EI year after year and work at or just above minimum wage for 50 weeks of the year and likely make less during the full year than many seasonal workers? EI should be for those who lose their jobs rather than those who work only part of the year, every year for their entire working life.

I am all for EI knowing that it serves a very important purpose, but that purpose should not be to supplement someone's income every year for their entire career because they choose to work only part of the year. EI, welfare and other such benefits should be based on need rather than choice, meaning that you need EI because you lost your job rather than you chose to work only part of the year, you need welfare because of a variety of reasons rather than because you choose to make a career out of it...

[PIK]

You can make her EI exempt. I've had a couple of situations like this where we employed family and that's what we did. If you don't feel comfortable with the process you can call Grants International

Being a busness owner I was in the same boat and grants fixed it all up.

[Accountability Now]

Being a busness owner I was in the same boat and grants fixed it all up.

We used them the first time but I found they were costly. Now our accounting firm does it for us a little to no cost.

[Topaz]

Many of the seasonal jobs are jobs that most people can't or won't so, so the people who are doing them are working and paying into EI, should get EI in return if they can't find other jobs and some of those reasons could be no transportation, age, lack of education and I'll bet these people are in an age group where other employers won't hire them, the boomers, in small town Canada but it wouldn't be surprising to find Harper is concentrating on the East Coast because of past remarks of the workers there. I have no problem with checking people out but isn't that suppose to be done BEFORE they get the money? It's unfair ro give people EI then cut them off.

[The_Squid]

EI is an insurance policy not a bank account. Some policing has to be done to minimize corruption.

Agreed. There are obligations that one has to live up to when one collects EI. I don't think that the requirements are onerous.

[shortlived]

people are suppose to be free from unreasonable search, it is unconstitutional.

sending police on evidence of fraud is one thing, searching for evidence without a warrant is another.

federal programs cannot be administered in violation of peoples constitutional rights.

what is being proposed is a charter violation. it is unreasonable search.

Edited February 22, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

What search shortlived?

[shortlived]

What search shortlived?

going to peoples homes in a search for evidence to incriminate them into fraud.

This right provides Canadians with their primary source of constitutionally

enforced privacy rights against unreasonable intrusion from the state.

Typically, this protects personal information that can be obtained

through searching someone in pat-down, entering someone's property or surveillance.

People on EI are going to have to put a big do not trespass sign along with a prohibition notice to the government of canada revoking access to their property for all government agents and employees.

Actually I think I may add gc to my list of governments that have prohibition notices against all their employees

It is a privacy violation.

Edited February 23, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

Sorry, it is not a violation of anyones rights.

Should this come to fruition, it would amount to an agent of the govt knocking on the door to check, if someone opens the door then no violation occurs.

The same way the cops can come in your house if you open the door and invite them in, and same with consenting car drivers make when asked to have the car searched. The law states that 'plain view' evidence means a cop or other authority can do a search and seizure without warrant. Think cops, MNR police when looking for hunters and their game while travelling on a road. They can pull you over and search the vehicle at anytime...no warrant needed.

Go ahead and put the sign up, but case law shows some people do not need to heed that warning, including the general public who may trespass.

Plenty of authority figures can come onto private property for various reasons.

Edited February 23, 2013 by guyser