Posted on 05/27/2020 5:22:40 PM PDT by fluorescence
Preschool teacher Lainy Morse has been out of work for more than two months. But the Portland, Ore., child care center where she worked is considering a reopening. Morse says she is dreading the idea, as much as she loves the infants and toddlers for which she cared.
"They always have snotty faces. It's just one cold after another," she says. "It feels just like an epicenter for spreading disease. And it feels really scary to go back to that."
In addition to risking infection with COVID-19, going back to work would also mean a cut in pay for Morse. Thanks to the extra $600 a week in unemployment benefits the federal government has been offering during the pandemic, Morse and her fellow teachers are making more now than they did on the job.
"It's terrible to say, but we're all doing better now," she says. "It's hard to think about going back to work in this pandemic and getting paid less than we are right now when we're safe and at home in quarantine."
It's a dilemma that millions of unemployed Americans may face as businesses around the country start to reopen. And it's a question lawmakers will be wrestling with as they debate whether to extend the supplemental unemployment benefits past July.
The Cracker Barrel restaurant where Avery Adams worked has just resumed limited indoor dining again after weeks of takeout-only service. But the Gravel Switch, Ky., resident is in no hurry to go back.
"I don't feel like it's over yet," Adams says, pointing to a jump in coronavirus deaths in Kentucky at the beginning of last week. "I would wait to see, as things reopen, if the caseload increases again."
The restaurant has been patient about recalling workers, and Adams has decided to stay home for now. Mostly he's concerned for the safety of the four older relatives with whom he lives. But the extra $600 he's receiving in unemployment benefits does factor into his decision.
"I would say it has to, to some extent," Adams says. "It still really needs to be more about my family members, but it's been very generous having the CARES Act."
Some business owners complain that generous unemployment benefits are making it harder for them to find workers.
Rachel Davis runs a consignment shop in Warrensburg, Mo. Since reopening this month, she's been buying hand sanitizer by the gallon.
"Disinfectant is my new fragrance," she jokes. She's limiting traffic in the store to three customers at a time. And everyone who comes in must wear a mask.
"Customers have thanked us for that," Davis says. "And my sales are actually up since we reopened."
Davis also gave her part-time employees a modest pay raise. But the $10 to $11 an hour they make is significantly less than they were collecting on unemployment. One of Davis' four workers has not come back.
"I know I shouldn't take it personally," Davis says. "She's doing what she feels [is] in her best interest. But as an employer, it actually kind of hurts."
Economists at the University of Chicago estimate that more than two-thirds of the workers on unemployment insurance are making more in jobless benefits than they did at work — in some cases two to three times as much. It's a stark reminder of just how low the pay is in many hard-hit industries such as restaurants and retail.
When millions of low-wage workers are suddenly forced to stop working to protect public health, there are good reasons for the federal government to step in with some relief.
"Getting people money today so that you can buy groceries and not go hungry, getting people money so they can pay their rent, the basic necessities of life, kind of makes sense," economist Joseph Vavra says. He notes that some workers lost health benefits as well as income. And the government's goal at first was to keep people at home.
Still, Vavra and his University of Chicago colleagues say the flat, $600-a-week benefit does create questions of fairness, especially when other low-income workers are still on the job doing essential work.
"If you're a janitor and you work at a hospital, you're facing increased risk at your job and likely have not received a pay raise," economist Peter Ganong says. "But if you're a janitor and you work at a school that's shut down, then you actually get a 50% pay raise from claiming unemployment benefits."
Likewise, retail workers on furlough are collecting 42% more on average from unemployment than the grocery workers who are busy stocking shelves.
Arguments about fairness and whether the extra unemployment benefits discourage a return to work are likely to grow louder in Congress. House Democrats passed a bill that would extend the additional benefits through January. Senate Republicans are resistant.
Ganong and Vavra stress that with double-digit unemployment, maintaining some form of enhanced benefits will be vital. But they suggest an alternative formula so that benefits more closely match — but don't exceed — workers' old paychecks.
The flat, $600-a-week figure was adopted in March as an expedient way to get money out the door quickly. By July, Ganong and Vavra argue, there should be time to craft a more nuanced approach.
In many cases, workers who turn down a job offer from their old employer may lose their eligibility to collect unemployment insurance.
That's a chance Sonya Chartier and her husband are willing to take. They both opted not to return to work at a Wisconsin furniture store where customers are not required to wear masks. Chartier says she worries about infecting her mother-in-law, who lives with the couple.
"We're lucky and we can decide to stay home," she says. "I know so many people can't make that decision, and it's really hard. But we don't feel like it's safe to go out yet."
Chartier has started to look for new jobs — maybe one she can do from home or while otherwise avoiding risk. Her No. 1 question for would-be employers: What are you doing to protect your workers?
The 600 dollar bonus ends in July. The issue will be over at that time. The people can either go to work, like they used to, or starve.
So I'm really not concerned as this won't last very long. American's on average work like 2 weeks longer than most any other people on the planet - people need to chill, but most everyone is stir crazy and wants to get back to work, perhaps employers will have to pay workers a bit more - oh no.
“”The $600 extra was by design by the DEMs ($15/hr times 40 hours), and the Republicans and Trump went along with it.””
Working exactly as planned - only government program to be successful. Now what? Oh - back to the old drawing board, I guess or to Pelosi’s kitchen for some new ideas.
Did you hear that Dennis Miller said the difference between her and her refrigerator is when you open the door to her fridge, the light comes on!! I know - that doesn’t do justice to the way he actually said it but it was super.
One of the early federal money giveaways included language saying that people did not have to go to work if they were afraid of getting the C-virus. This may be why people can stay home from their jobs even if the business reopens.
It seems that the lower level a job is, the bigger the difference in the money amounts. A restaurant dishwasher can easily get another job if he gets fired for not going back. He may never have had a four month vacation with pay in his entire life ...then again, who has?
The logistics of that could be a little difficult but that is what he said.
Most pathetic headline ever, maybe.
Pelosi runs a good part of the country. The GOP are cucks.
Yes. It is never fair when you take the money out of one man’s pocket to put it in the pocket of another man.
And it is very damaging to the economy when you give a man an incentive NOT TO WORK!
Idiots.
That's a chance Sonya Chartier and her husband are willing to take. They both opted not to return to work at a Wisconsin furniture store where customers are not required to wear masks. Chartier says she worries about infecting her mother-in-law, who lives with the couple.
Having seen how the bureaucracy works it is very likely that they will continue to receive their state unemployment benefits even though they have turned down work.
But they had better save those benefits, not spend them.
There is a chance that their failure to accept work will eventually be discovered and the state will want that money back. And government is never happy to wait for money that was accepted in bad faith.
The State will be making threats of prosecution and jail. And those threats will not be empty threats.
L8r
Government making living in poverty easy. Sickening. People have no pride. Every last pathetic person who refuses to go back to work shouldn’t get a dime.
If your job has been offered back, and you refuse, then ALL unemployment benefits end, and you are not able to come back. There are lots of other people who will work in your place. Starve greedy bastard. Starve!
The supposed safety catch is that if they are called back to work and refuse to go, the benefits stop short.
If you get a check from the government and a the money is not for goods and/or services rendered, it’s all welfare.
In Wisconsin the monthly sum would be around $3700 or $23 hr
I heard this morning from my old boss that the new plan is to pay everyone with a job $4300. Where is all this money coming from? Millennials and those generations to follow.
“”He may never have had a four month vacation with pay in his entire life ...then again, who has?””
Is that how long the extra $600 is supposed to last? I have gotten lost in the weeds of all these bills - they were talking about #3 before I even knew what #1 and #2 were. I guess there’s a #4 already and moving on to #5 or in DC speak - probably #10....
The people who keep putting these idiots back in office are the ones who will be paying the bills. Hope they enjoy it. Sad that our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren will have to divvy up also but they need to learn what it’s all about early on and get busy and reclaim their country! Hard to see what will be left to reclaim if things continue like they are. Not their parents/grandparents country for sure!
While I was out for 6 weeks while I waited to be able to go back to work, our business had weekly meetings on Zoom. During one of those early meetings, my boss informed us that he knew we might make more than we normally do using unemployment insurance. However, he did say this when we were able to get back to work, and we refused, it’d be considered quitting, and if we continued to try to receive UI, he’d inform the Employment Security Dept. that we were no longer eligible.
Makes perfect sense to me. As it was, I did apply for and received unemployment. We are now back to work, granted in a limited capacity. Everyone came back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.