Man Working for Free, Loses Benefits

NW Cable News ^ | 09/02/03 | Staff Writer

[bedolido]

BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) -- John Bothe was unemployed with time to spare - so he paid a radio station about $1,000 for air time to showcase his talents as host of a Saturday sports show.

Now he's finding the price of that show may be much higher.

The state Labor Department determined that Bothe's unpaid radio gig qualified as work and disqualified him from receiving unemployment benefits.

Not only has the state put a halt on future benefits, it wants Bothe to return $605 he already collected.

"My definition of work is doing a job and getting paid for it, not paying them," said Bothe, who lost his first appeal. He'll make his case again at an administrative hearing Sept. 8.

A Labor Department spokesman, Robert Lillpopp, told the Daily News of Batavia last week he could not comment on specific cases but that being available to work is important when collecting benefits.

"In order to get (benefits) you have to be ready, willing and available to work," he said.

Bothe explained to the department he had not been paid for the work but was told he had not read the state handbook outlining conditions for receiving benefits.

The handbook states that a person receiving benefits must report "any activity that brings in or may bring in income at any time."

Bothe, track announcer at Batavia Downs, said he was trying to improve his chances of staying off unemployment in the future, when he initiated the radio show after the season had ended at the harness race track.

"I thought if I get on the radio maybe somebody will hear me and I'll pick up some work," he said.

Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[Hodar]

The handbook states that a person receiving benefits must report "any activity that brings in or may bring in income at any time."

And this is correct. When I was unemployed, I thought that this would be a good time to start the groundwork for building my own company. However, it is not legal for anyone to do the footwork involved in starting an enterprise, financed by taxpayer dollars. If you want to start an enterprise, you have to do it entirely on your own.

[Mr. Bird]

Odd. I would look at his activity as similar to copying and mailing thousands of resumes. That activity tends to eventually land one a job, and it appears he is advertising himself in an unconventional fashion, but it's the same thing in principle.

I agree that one cannot actually finance an enterprise with such funding, but this appears to be a little different. If he did not pay the station, would they then consider him unemployed?

[trebb]

Freakin' amazing - sit on your butt - collect with no problem; do something to try to be desirable to the job market - get punished... And then they wonder how we became a welfare society...

[Chewbacca]

He could always claim that he was not working but undergoing training for future work prospects.

The radio station could claim they were paid to provide the man training in broadcasting and not a job.

[only1percent]

It's a subtle distinction. In NY, the Department of Labor depends to focus on the overt nature of the services provided. If you went on the radio and spent an hour asking for a job and describing you skillset, no problem. If the services are not expressly about getting a job, big problem.

The "building a business" rules are tougher. I've done volunteer lawyering for people getting UI and trying to set up businesses, and what I always tell them is not to incorporate or set up the business formally before they've sold work and actually started the job. If the efforts are postured at an effort to get employment from third parties, than there's no problem. (In other words, if you say, "Hi, I'm owner of JoeCo and would like you to hire JoeCo to do your renovation," no benefits, but if you say, "Hi, I'm Joe and I'm a master carpenter -- would you hire me to do your renovation," OK -- since you're trying to get work.)

[A. Goodwin]

I agree - this is ridiculous. I understand the concern about people abusing the system by collecting benefits while having some sort of underground work (e.g. housecleaning or babysitting or whatever), but it seems they should be really careful about how they enforce it. This guy ought to be held up as a model for other aid recipients - putting in some serious and unconventional effort to improve his options. (Of course, we're assuming that there isn't more to Labor's side of the story...)

This rule makes sense in a general way, but personally I would prefer that people double-dip a bit on their way to becoming productive citizens, rather than having the state keep them totally dependent right up to when their benefits run out (although I would really prefer hard work and no cheating...)

[Orange1998]

You would make an excellent attorney.

[Chewbacca]

"You would make an excellent attorney."

What? Debase myself? I am an Engineer. I have more brains than an attorney.

[Orange1998]

Your angle was perfect for a defense. Engineers look at problems from different angles. Kudos for forward thinking.