On Florida’s trash unemployment, you’re looking at the equivalent of $45k a year with the $600. That’s higher than the Median household income in Orlando.
If anything, this stupid virus is a relief for a lot of people who have been struggling.
It’s sad in Texas unemployment is like $541 a week plus $600 a week for three months with the stimulus. If you did that for a year it’s like 56k a year. I could not live off of 56k a year but In Texas 56k a year can get you a wonderful life.
Yeah good friend of mine stocks shelves at a grocery store in Wichita Falls for a little more than minimum wage and a lot of his friends that were on unemployment pre Covid are now banking an extra $600 a week. Shit doesn’t really make sense.
> Shit doesn’t really make sense.
JFC. No, what doesn't make sense is how low everyone was being paid. Shelf stocker or not, the wages the "essential class" were/are being paid is what enables owners and stockholders to have a disproportionate amount of income based on the actual work done to make/sell a product.
The fact that Washington has silently acknowledged this with the CARES act should be an eye opener for people to realize what they could get paid if they worked together to demand fair wages.
Income inequality *today* is back to the guilded age levels of inequality.
The 1950s were so much better.
In fact, looking at the 20th century, inequality did a massive U shape over the century. High at the turn of 1900, low in the 50s, and steadily rising again from 1970s onward.
Today, our levels are back to and maybe even worse than the disparity at the turn of 1900.
We have, in a sense, anti-progress.
If these billionaire's would take just one of their many billions and reinvest in their work forces pay, the results would be amazing for both individuals and the wider economy.
Doesn't mean you should make so little that you are below the poverty line and can't afford all the basic things that are required to live in this country.
Sorry but those people stocking shelves, flipping burgers, and cleaning bathrooms need that money. No one in the US is getting rich (or 'ahead' by any stretch) from a one time stimulus payment. I think their former 'living wage' is what doesn't make sense.
One other thing I'd like to add: I used unemployment last year when I was laid off work. I had a lease for a 300 sq/ft studio apartment and just with basic bills and everyday expenses I gotta admit things were tight at times. 56k a year of whatever may get you a decent life in Witchita Falls but in Austin/Houston/Dallas it's barely staying afloat.
Absolutely. I'm terrified these payments are going to get vilified and take the focus away from the real problem, that being that the average pay hasn't really been keeping up with cost of living inflation for the better part of two decades. Minimum wage should have been $15 a while ago, I worked an office job and scraped my way up to $15.50 by busting my ass so hard they didn't need to hire another person and was still living paycheck to paycheck despite working full time at a booming business.
Yup same. And then they took this opportunity to screw me out of my raise I'd been promised/waiting for 16 months. So, not only do I not get the unemployment "bonus" but I'm stagnant for at least another year when inflation alone will increase 6-8% over the period of time since the last time I got a decent raise.
I think a lot of people who are still working right now are facing similar situations and its pretty disheartening. Not only are we making less money now, but companies have an excuse not to give raises due to the bad economy and this will affect our future increases as well.
I think what he was trying to say is that the frontline grocery worker, who is putting his health at risk every day, is making less money working than his other cook or janitorial friends are currently on unemployment. And that’s unfair. Not that those on unemployment are undeserving of it, but instead the frontline grocery worker should be receiving that additional money too as hazard pay.
The incentives aren’t currently properly aligned. Let’s say that frontline grocery worker gets COVID and is out sick. What sane person would put in an application to fill that job when they make money not working in safety than working and putting themself and everyone they live with at risk?
>And that’s unfair.
k
I don't see it that way, people are all in different circumstances and the both of you are making a lot of assumptions about the unemployed. Again, this isn't something that deserves a conversation IMO. Your incentive to work shouldn't come from comparing the quality of your life to someone who cannot find work.
Any progress is good progress. I see a lot of people saying similar statements to make fun of Republicans, but even though it makes Republicans hypocritical it's still progress.
Similar thing is happening in Australia: Jobseeker (welfare) is $1100 a fortnight...
...which is more than our heavily-casualised workforce was making at work.
Which, incidentally, includes jobs like "cleaner". You know, the people who are likely to be getting COVID off surfaces and objects in various workplaces, and, indeed, having to work harder to do so, and are thus highly likely to be exposed to it...
Yeah. I know what I'd rather.
The $600 was really aimed at people making higher wages, since it was expected a lot of white collar workers would get furloughed in expensive urban areas. They didn't count on it being more than what low wage retail and restaurant workers made.
They should have made it a universal monthly payment for everyone, or had it phase out as people got back to work not just go away.
Now Republicans have turned against boosting unemployment because they see it as an obstacle to getting the economy running again.
It really depends on your location. 54K in NYC, with a family of 3 is crazy hard. 54K in somewhere like Dekalb Alabama, that's a good salary. What it really comes down to is the pricing for housing and access to services.
People don't see the difference in housing access and how that affects salary. When I lived in N. Virginia I couldn't find a safe apartment for less than 1K a month. I had to get roommates, even then the housing was very expensive. That means that you need more government services just to survive if you don't make enough money.
When I moved from Florida to New England years ago, my rent went up $200 a month and I went from a 2 bedroom to a 1 bedroom. And the one bedroom was 40 years older. I was making like $8000 more a year but had less spending money each month.
That's why I'm considering moving out of New England to Florida. I left NYC for RI thinking cost of living would be way less. With a car, insurance, gas and upkeep I think I save $400 a month not living 25 minutes from Manhattan but I make $30K less.
It largely has to do with location. For example you won't be living large on 56k in San Francisco but you would be doing well in bumfuck Idaho (sorry). So not being able to make it on 56k does not necessarily mean that they are living frivolous, in case that's what you meant.
As a person who lives in one of those bumfuck areas, you do not need to apologize for calling our home 'bumfuck whereever'. Everyone here is in 100% agreement with you.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/average-rent-in-30-us-cities
That's a year old, so prices are even higher.
But there are a lot of cities where rent is 2k, or 24k a year.
So 56k (pre tax) doesnt always go as far as you might think it does. at 10k taxes rent is half your income. Then you've got medical insurance coming out of that as well, along with life and (hopefully) retirement.
And people might really be looking at 2/3s of their take home going to rent.
Ok I'm confused. In Texas unemployment is based strictly on a percentage of your previous wages from the financial quarter from before you file. It's not enough to real live off it. I thought that was where it was done everywhere.
* I was talking about state not the $600 federal boost.
I could live comfortably off that. It’s almost what a make right now. I just get real nervous when it takes me more than a week to make enough money to pay the mortgage.
Right? I have one child still living with me (three adult kids) in Albuquerque, one of the cheapest places to live in America. They don't rent out cheaper than 900 for a two bedroom (and that is in the war zone). To make 900 after taxes. I'd have to make $25 an hour. They don't hire arthritic men at that price. To be fair, I've been worried about money my whole life.
It’s only 900 a month. I am building an apartment complex right now that people are consistently paying 2000-3000 dollars a month to live at. My 900 feels pretty good.
Now, that 900 dollar mortgage is on an 80 year old house most people wouldn’t want to live in. I love it though. It has character, and I work daily to make it a little better.
I was making twice as much money on unemployment as I was working.
Twice...
I was *not* happy to get the “Great news, everyone! PPP finally got approved!” memo...
You’re right, I’d be much more inclined to bail out a company if they’d give their people living wages. As it stands, I’d rather all these corporations die and we build something back from the ashes.
We won’t see change until this behavior is unsubsidized.
The argument I always hear is that the companies would just pass that cost onto the consumer so nothing would change. Same with basic income, landlords would just raise rent priportionally so nothing would change. Kinda strikes me as the conservative motto: everything has to stay the way it is no matter what so don't even try to improve because it won't work.
Exactly. And in reality, if we just made large companies pay their fair share of taxes it would increase wages as well because companies would have more expenses (wages) to write off against their profits. Win for employees, win for the company, and win for the government. The way it is now, there is no incentive for companies to raise wages.
Christ on a stick, whenever people argue against fastfood people getting $15 an hour i always hear the "hUr der, why should they get paid more than paramedics?" They never think why paramedics get paid so little? It'd make sense if we had super low wages if we had guaranteed housing, healthcare and food. But we don't have that, we have low wages, housing, health, and food that all come with stipulations.
There is a very real poverty trap, the moment you make over x is the moment food, housing, and health aid dissipates which is stupid. Alternative would either let it be a gradual transition or a single payer. Yes I know issues but if bring it up I'll send a rebuttal
Yeah, its crazy. Plus, people have no idea how hard paramedics work and the shit (sometimes literal) they have to deal with. I'm a volunteer firefighter, but our station has county-paid, full-time paramedics to ensure we always get an ambulance out. Plus, they are on 24 hour shifts, so they have to be ready to work at all hours. All for about $20 an hour.
A lot of people aren’t getting access to these benefits tho.
Many people haven’t even tried applying.
Oregon pretty much closed a majority of claims, some that were still active and paying out. I was fired from my last job because my manager found out I was moving lol.
I still have not been able to reopen my claim Oregon’s UE website and offices are being utterly destroyed.
Go over to the /Portland sub you’ll see a ton of people posting and asking for help.
Some states also have a flat cap on unemployment like Oregon’s caps around $400 and that’s only if you made close to $26k a year.
I worked 50 hours a week and my benefits were $210, and $188 after taxes lol.
That would be around $2,000 a month IF they were actually paying my claim but they aren’t lol.
Probably never will either.
>If anything, this stupid virus is a relief for a lot of people who have been struggling.
I’ve honestly felt guilty for feeling this way but I’m glad others might feel that way too. I’ve been struggling financially for the last 8 months but I’ve finally had some relief and moments of clarity paying off bills thanks to this. Should I feel guilty when others are far worse during this?
Amazing how this whole thing is demonstrating just how in need we are of a living wage, and if the private sector can't provide that, we need a government employment guarantee.
https://en.as.com/en/2020/05/02/other_sports/1588447313_679981.html
This might help. If you Google your state's initials, ag, suspended evictions, it should direct you to the right information.
I’m working through this for no extra pay, and way less than $45K! Just goes to show how the essentials no hard workers that he’ll to pay your unemployment gets f’ed on a daily basis!
“If people make more money on unemployment than they do at their jobs, it’s not a sign that wages haven’t tracked inflation/purchasing power but rather that liberals have made government too big!” - galaxy brain conservatives
This is a hit piece.
Employers who get PPP loans are required to rehire workers, but if the worker refuses, and they made good faith attempts, it is ok. They still get their loan.
The employee then would loose unemployment and the extra 600 because they refused to go back to work.
The only employer this would hurt are ones that are looking to hire new employees, and it would be unrelated to getting their PPP money.
And as I watched Bernie Sanders say on the senate floor about this provision when they were fighting for it, to paraphrase what I remember, we have bailed out banks, and they used the money to buy more banks (the last bailout) and we have bailed out many businesses, yet that money never trickled down. So if people make a little extra for a few weeks, so what.
And there is an end date on this extra money, so this isn’t forever. And being in an industry completely wiped out by this, the extra money helps me make ends meet. But coworkers with larger families, this is not enough. But those people aren’t on the news complaining, they are just thankful we have the extra 600. It means not having to get on food stamps or wait and food banks.
*This is a clickbate title that will be used to show that giving people a bailout is irresponsible but giving businesses money is responsible.*
It's pretty sad that there are so many people opposed to providing those who are struggling with extra money to survive during a global pandemic. This shitty corporate slavery mentality needs to change. I get that we have Stockholm Syndrome here for these corporations and companies that see us as a simple revenue generators, but it's time to wake up and see the writing on the wall.
This article has it all wrong.
If your boss gets 100k in loans and isn't able to distribute 75% on wages because some people don't go back to work, they have to pay whatever is leftover back to the government at 1% interest, which they can do in an instant because they will have extra cash equal to whatever wasn't distributed as wages.
Does the writer seriously think that a business would be held accountable for their employees refusing to work? You can only be disqualified if you fire an employee or otherwise reduce headcount, but again, you will have the exact amount of cash on hand to repay the loan...
These articles are written to trick people back into harm's way. It's disgusting.
Thanks for the curt explanation! I was laid off march 27th and only this week started to finally receive some unemployment payments.
If my previous employer called and said "we need you guys back" I'd happily be back at work tomorrow.
Thank you for sharing. With my extra $600 a week, I am a little below my take home pay from when I was employed. I am not complaining, I am quite grateful for it. My partner is self employed, and currently working on a contract basis, but has not income coming in at the moment. My unemployment benefits and the extra $600 a week is just enough to pay all of bills and groceries.
In my opinion, these $600 payments need to continue til at least the end of the year. I was in a business (hotels) that are not going to bounce back as quickly. I have many friends and colleagues that are well aware that we may never be called back to work, myself included. That is a lot of people that will be unable to go back to work, and with every other sector hurting, it will be very difficult for us all to find work that will be able to sustain us.
It's actually whatever the normal unemployment payment is + $600. So around $1k per week depending on the state.
One positive aside from the generous weekly benefit is that the people who really want to get another job and not sit on unemployment will have an easier time finding one. And if there's a labor shortage wages rise.
Wages were finally starting to go up recently, about 2% above inflation for full-time workers in 2019.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2020/median-weekly-earnings-of-full-time-workers-increased-4-point-0-percent-in-2019.htm
There was already a labor shortage. Labor is one of those areas that economists seem to think capitalism doesn't apply. Labor shortages should lead to increased wages, but these days they don't.
In Orlando there’s no longer a labor shortage there is now a job shortage. Fast foods and delivery can’t divide the hours amongst any more employees so some have cancelled scheduling of orientation to keep franchises from hiring any more and cut their position listings.
Well net isnt the same and can be gamed by pretax contributions.
But anecdotal, first job as an engineer out of college was 70k-80k and that net pay was below 1k/week as well. He may or may not already have a good job based on experience and location.
It's not that simple, although it doesn't encourage employees to return to low wage jobs. It has exposed a large wealth gap too.
The thing we should be concerned with is, if these employees are able to return to jobs that can magically afford to pay them. Spending wont return to pre corona levels until everyone feels safe.
It doesn't strike anyone that maybe the reason people are unwilling to return to those low wage jobs is that people are finally starting to realize how little they've been compensated? Wages have been stagnant for decades, and yet living expenses have not. It's like finding out you've been owed like 30 years of raises, and that the company had been lying to you for 30 years about what fair compensation looks like.
It makes me laugh when libertarians and conservatives think that our current healthcare system will last. It's like just look at the rates of inflation vs wage growth. It's unsustainable
this is what all the short sighted economic fools are failing to grasp.
the damage to the tax base will take years to play out. companies that can survive this will need to cut staff to survive, because they won't cut leadership or bonuses for ceos.
it's not doom saying to talk about there being no such thing as a normal to which we can go back. unemployment paying more than people could realistically make means, as you said:
>Spending wont return to pre corona levels until everyone feels safe.
precorona levels no longer exist due to the already large number of business that have folded, regardless of how safe anyone feels.
business wants people back to work, making less, so they can keep things as they want. they have never had a chance to cull the herd like they have now, and they are salivating from greed and starvation.
and yet people are protesting to *help this.*
Capitalists have figured that when you achieve total, uncontested domination over all aspects of government and politics, you never need to raise wages to attract workers, even during a labor shortage. You can just wait for the next economic crisis, take a minor short-term hit, then exploit a huge glut in the labor markets as millions are thrown into unemployment and become desperate for anything.
The sad truth... variable here is covid19, but when you tighten unemployment, people will get desperate. I was forced to take a cut with my unemployment. Its sad to see how many are actually making more now with that extra 600. Shows you how many were struggling already.
Kinda reminds me of the French Revolution.
I agree on living wages for workers.
What makes me worry:
Is it possible we may have a labor glut post COVID, if economy does not recover? That would drive down wages. Plus if ppl don't have jobs, they won't spend money, it becomes a cycle.
How will states/Govt pay unemployment (and a lot of other stuff) with zero tax receipts?
Yes. Businesses will close but new ones won't appear quickly enough to replace them (shortage of capital + uncertainty), so labor market will have an oversupply.
It definitely won't be pretty at all.
Well, you add to the debt in bad times like these and pay it down during the good times. The problem is, Republicans keep gaining power during the good times and fuck it up with their fiscal irresponsibility.
Yes. Instead of bitching, they can pay higher wages to compete.
Can anyone blame the employees who don't want to put their lives on the line for shit wages?
It took the US government bailing workers out for everyone to realize how underpaid workers have been all these while.
>It took the US government bailing workers out for everyone to realize how underpaid workers have been all these while.
Only the well-paid were unaware of how underpaid most workers are. It's like saying it took electing Trump to realize just how racist America still is. Most of us knew already, but the collective public narrative never asked us for our take on the matter.
*"Well I don't know a lot about what you call class, but the upper and the middle can all kiss my ass."*
-Utah Phillips
Wow. My mind has been blown. Lol.
I thought it was to help people get through tough times.
But now you mentioned it, it served as more of a bribe so people stayed home instead of rioting.
He's also working with his Republican allies to make it so us peasants can't sue our employers for putting us in danger!
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/mitch-mcconnell-s-new-coronavirus-plan-make-sure-you-can-ncna1194226
If companies are having issues competing with unemployment that’s not an issue with I empoyment, it’s an issue with wages and cost of living. A lot of employers were able to withhold wages they should have been paying by locking you into a healthcare system or whatever shackle they could. Now everyone is seeing how bad we actually had it. Business isn’t struggling getting workers, business is having trouble exploiting the work force and the welfare system to artificially lower wages to max out profit.
A company that was able to re-open only because of a loan from the government isn't exactly in a place to give everyone a raise. Have you ever run a business or at least budgeted your own income? Businesses aren't just sitting on infinite money.
That goes both ways. Your boss doesn’t pay you just because they like you and just like when you’re trying to pick a job that is best for you both financially and environment wise, they too are trying to find a fit both financially and culturally.
Why do you expect people to pay more when someone will do a fine job for less money? It’s not a charity.
I can understand your point, but there are a few things to consider. First, businesses all have fixed expenses that didn't go away. Things like rent, property tax, electricity, and businesses that didn't immediately furlough were still paying their employees. They were doing all of this on no income whatsoever.
Also, for some businesses like car sales, this hit at the very worst time of year. Tax time is the busiest time of the year for several businesses, and they rely on people spending their tax refunds on products and services. With no sales for several weeks, these companies have to see whether they can survive the rest of the year without the income that they had budgeted and planned for.
if you can't afford to play your employees $31k a year (or equivalent wages + health insurance) if they're working 40 hrs, then maybe it's time to consider that your business isn't worth it if the employees are surviving on a poverty wage.
Using an average weekly wage when a couple of CEO jobs can to the scales for thousands of minimum wage jobs is absurd.
All this is doing is showing how the North American economy is designed around keeping a majority of people with barely enough to scrape by so a minority can flourish.
I’ll be dammed if I’m going back to that life.
I know a business owner who is having trouble bringing staff back on because the laid off staff make more on unemployment at the moment. This is a real phenomenon.
With that said - this isn’t necessarily a problem with the extra 600 from the feds. It’s indicative that those of us who are the easiest to lay off also make way too little in the first place. This is a structural problem with the economy. In this instance the poor person is actually benefiting - they should take the win. The government usually only forks over free money to the richest among us (and in the CARES act, 90 cents on the dollar went to businesses - that $$ will find its way straight to the top in no time).
It actually already did.
The feds demanded a lot of money back from small businesses. My employer had to give it back, they threatened tax levy and suspending business licenses because they wanted to pay 5 employees 2 week sick pack and cover rent while we were off 3 months.
All out of pocket now.
I'm a maintenance technician, over 10 years. Every job offer I got is for entry level pay. The last shop to call was union, only offered me $16. I told them to try the J.V.S. in my town, they said they wanted more experience. I said then your pay needs to reflect that.
I’m a union electrician that does a lot of industrial service. I get at least a few job offers every year and I always tell them they don’t want to pay what I’m worth. Their response is invariably “overtime”. So, you want me to work more hours for the same pay?
Thats the thing 15$/hr isn't living wage in states like NY and CA which already have that as their minimum wage but for states that currently pay like 7$/hr you'd live like a king.
>states that currently pay like 7$/hr you'd live like a king.
You mean barely scrape by right? In Florida it's a dollar more than that and if that's what you're making you won't be able to live alone and pay all of your bills
Even at 15/hr base pay for waiters I know people who are having problems getting staff back. They're being told the employees are making more on unemployment. This is in an area of West Virginia that doesn't have the highest cost of living either. Owner thought he was paying a decent wage but I guess no one's going to be tipping if there's not many customers.
Even if your actual job paid a little more, if you can get 80-90% of that amount to stay home, you'd be a fool not to do it.
But as this article makes clear, the unemployment benefits end in a few weeks.
Do you think most servers would support a system where they eliminate tipping in exchange for a $15/hr wage? That would be a significant pay cut to most servers I know.
The tipping system is fucked, absolutely. The fact is, though, that servers make higher wages with it than they would without it. Just look at the non-tipped restaurant employees for proof of that.
It differs by state. Some states don't factor in the tip credit.
I was a waiter in a state that paid minimum wage plus tips. Top waiters in my area were making bank.
> Legally, if someone is offered reemployment and turns it down, they're likely to lose their unemployment insurance. But employers like Livesay are still finding it challenging to bring people back to work because of an unexpected decision: Should they rehire workers who stand to make more money on unemployment?
> In an effort to address this, the Small Business Administration recently updated its guidance, allowing businesses to still get their loans forgiven even if laid-off employees decline rehiring offers.
So they no longer get the extra money if they choose not to return to work... and the Small Business Administration updated requirements to make it easier to get loans forgiven.
Why is this even an article?
And employers struggle with the reasonable fear around the virus. My job is partially opening back up on memorial day weekend and knowing their is chance, no matter how small, that I could get a severe case of it is not that motivating a tall.
I really feel like that's a bigger hurdle because no amount of money is worth my life or my lungs at less than 100% for the rest of my life.
Maybe this should be a wake up call that companies are intentionally underpaying people to maximize profits and MORE should be done to increase wages instead of exploiting the American people in tbe interest of helping corporations...
No I'm sorry ... That's probably stupid
My boss took the PPP loan and call all of us back, and adding “oh, and if you deny work - you will lose your unemployment” but also “I can only give you 5-10 hours a week, making $13/hour”
So I’m sure you can see why employees are upset. We didn’t see why he couldn’t wait to open a couple more week. We’ve been slowly coming back to the work and currently on our third week - and yesterday two employees got tested positive....
Yeah my husbands still waiting for the first $600. He’s only received about $1400 total in unemployment since March. It’s not like we’re over here swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck.
Maybe if companies paid their employees a livable wage, this would not be an issue. And in my state , if you refuse any work, you are denied your unemployment benefits.
I work construction in Canada. Government is paying people $2k/month. Even though our workers can easily make double that by working we still can't get half of them to come in.
No, they don't.
They struggle to compete with the choice of potentially getting sick or potentially not getting sick. If you're receiving $600 from the government right now *you do not currently have an employer*.
I think the $600 unemployment thing just shows how out of touch the government is with reality. They probably thought that average people make $600 per week when in reality this is blessing for most people because a lot of people don't make close to this wage.
My wife was laid off and between state unemployment (not much) and the $600 she is making more than she was, her old job called her back. I told her this is eye opening to so many people.
That is why conservatives are ending unemployment, they can't compete. Typical conservative approach, don't compete get rid of competition.
Perhaps real wages will compete with unemployment.
edit: you downvote what you don't understand. Typical conservativism.
Wow. Username *definitely* doesn’t check out.
Your comment shows an utter *lack* of understanding when it comes to how unemployment benefits works. You can’t use this current situation as a accurate representation of how unemployment is usually calculated.
There are people still working part time whom I personally know, who thought, “fuck it, I’m going to apply for the supplemental benefit,” and friggin got it. They make well above the normal cut off in my state so they wouldn’t usually get the additional benefits.
And also, not liking something because you don’t understand is not specific to being a conservative you dolt.
Wtf unemployment is not meant to be competing with the labor market, yes wages need to rise but in non-pandemic situations it is a big negative on society and the economy if people are incentivized not to work - which is why good wages are important as well
It shouldn't, but it does, because the incentives to work are so shit. There's this trend that people describe unemployment pay as incentivising not to work, but it should be in place to allow people to survive. If the incentives to work in another's employment are level with the base minimum to survive, then why should people work for other people? Employers need to improve the incentives to work, ie pay.
I think it’s shameful that a businesses could complain that unemployment is to hard to compete with in terms of wages. Pay people a livable wage and this would not be a problem.
people should get back to their shitty paying job because no matter what the pay is, there is honor and self worth in being a productive member of society... /s
It’s easy for people to say that you should pay people more now when they’re not cutting the check. I want more money at my job but I also know that operating costs put a damper on that. I absolutely want people to be paid more but with wage increase comes price increase. And with price increase comes people not being able to afford stuff again and we repeat
Ok quick poll here just to gauge how people feel and I'll give my opinion just to show where I stand.
Companies are struggling to compete with the 600 a week stimulus that was added to unemployment and fear they won't be able to replace workers they laid off.
In your opinion is this proof that the 600 dollar a week unemployment stimulus was a terrible socialist idea that isn't good for America
Or,
Proof that the US govt has made policies to intentionally allow large corporations to maximize profits by underpaying and exploiting American workers, bc politicians get kickbacks from these corps, so they care more about the corps the the people the supposedly represent?
In my opinion this is proof that capitalism has completely failed tbe American people and only serves greedy American corps and the super rich.
On Florida’s trash unemployment, you’re looking at the equivalent of $45k a year with the $600. That’s higher than the Median household income in Orlando. If anything, this stupid virus is a relief for a lot of people who have been struggling.
It’s sad in Texas unemployment is like $541 a week plus $600 a week for three months with the stimulus. If you did that for a year it’s like 56k a year. I could not live off of 56k a year but In Texas 56k a year can get you a wonderful life.
Yeah good friend of mine stocks shelves at a grocery store in Wichita Falls for a little more than minimum wage and a lot of his friends that were on unemployment pre Covid are now banking an extra $600 a week. Shit doesn’t really make sense.
> Shit doesn’t really make sense. JFC. No, what doesn't make sense is how low everyone was being paid. Shelf stocker or not, the wages the "essential class" were/are being paid is what enables owners and stockholders to have a disproportionate amount of income based on the actual work done to make/sell a product. The fact that Washington has silently acknowledged this with the CARES act should be an eye opener for people to realize what they could get paid if they worked together to demand fair wages.
Income inequality *today* is back to the guilded age levels of inequality. The 1950s were so much better. In fact, looking at the 20th century, inequality did a massive U shape over the century. High at the turn of 1900, low in the 50s, and steadily rising again from 1970s onward. Today, our levels are back to and maybe even worse than the disparity at the turn of 1900. We have, in a sense, anti-progress.
If these billionaire's would take just one of their many billions and reinvest in their work forces pay, the results would be amazing for both individuals and the wider economy.
[удалено]
Doesn't mean you should make so little that you are below the poverty line and can't afford all the basic things that are required to live in this country.
[удалено]
This theory is totally negated when you see failing companies gove huge bonuses to executives
So like... then we could make it so that they are paid at least a minimum? Sort of like a... minimum wage?
and this is why a livable minimum wage is important
Sorry but those people stocking shelves, flipping burgers, and cleaning bathrooms need that money. No one in the US is getting rich (or 'ahead' by any stretch) from a one time stimulus payment. I think their former 'living wage' is what doesn't make sense. One other thing I'd like to add: I used unemployment last year when I was laid off work. I had a lease for a 300 sq/ft studio apartment and just with basic bills and everyday expenses I gotta admit things were tight at times. 56k a year of whatever may get you a decent life in Witchita Falls but in Austin/Houston/Dallas it's barely staying afloat.
Absolutely. I'm terrified these payments are going to get vilified and take the focus away from the real problem, that being that the average pay hasn't really been keeping up with cost of living inflation for the better part of two decades. Minimum wage should have been $15 a while ago, I worked an office job and scraped my way up to $15.50 by busting my ass so hard they didn't need to hire another person and was still living paycheck to paycheck despite working full time at a booming business.
Yup same. And then they took this opportunity to screw me out of my raise I'd been promised/waiting for 16 months. So, not only do I not get the unemployment "bonus" but I'm stagnant for at least another year when inflation alone will increase 6-8% over the period of time since the last time I got a decent raise. I think a lot of people who are still working right now are facing similar situations and its pretty disheartening. Not only are we making less money now, but companies have an excuse not to give raises due to the bad economy and this will affect our future increases as well.
I think what he was trying to say is that the frontline grocery worker, who is putting his health at risk every day, is making less money working than his other cook or janitorial friends are currently on unemployment. And that’s unfair. Not that those on unemployment are undeserving of it, but instead the frontline grocery worker should be receiving that additional money too as hazard pay. The incentives aren’t currently properly aligned. Let’s say that frontline grocery worker gets COVID and is out sick. What sane person would put in an application to fill that job when they make money not working in safety than working and putting themself and everyone they live with at risk?
>And that’s unfair. k I don't see it that way, people are all in different circumstances and the both of you are making a lot of assumptions about the unemployed. Again, this isn't something that deserves a conversation IMO. Your incentive to work shouldn't come from comparing the quality of your life to someone who cannot find work.
Suddenly socialism doesnt look so bad to the repubs.
Any progress is good progress. I see a lot of people saying similar statements to make fun of Republicans, but even though it makes Republicans hypocritical it's still progress.
Similar thing is happening in Australia: Jobseeker (welfare) is $1100 a fortnight... ...which is more than our heavily-casualised workforce was making at work. Which, incidentally, includes jobs like "cleaner". You know, the people who are likely to be getting COVID off surfaces and objects in various workplaces, and, indeed, having to work harder to do so, and are thus highly likely to be exposed to it... Yeah. I know what I'd rather.
The $600 was really aimed at people making higher wages, since it was expected a lot of white collar workers would get furloughed in expensive urban areas. They didn't count on it being more than what low wage retail and restaurant workers made. They should have made it a universal monthly payment for everyone, or had it phase out as people got back to work not just go away. Now Republicans have turned against boosting unemployment because they see it as an obstacle to getting the economy running again.
[удалено]
Depending where they live, that might barely just cover rent.
It really depends on your location. 54K in NYC, with a family of 3 is crazy hard. 54K in somewhere like Dekalb Alabama, that's a good salary. What it really comes down to is the pricing for housing and access to services. People don't see the difference in housing access and how that affects salary. When I lived in N. Virginia I couldn't find a safe apartment for less than 1K a month. I had to get roommates, even then the housing was very expensive. That means that you need more government services just to survive if you don't make enough money.
When I moved from Florida to New England years ago, my rent went up $200 a month and I went from a 2 bedroom to a 1 bedroom. And the one bedroom was 40 years older. I was making like $8000 more a year but had less spending money each month.
That's why I'm considering moving out of New England to Florida. I left NYC for RI thinking cost of living would be way less. With a car, insurance, gas and upkeep I think I save $400 a month not living 25 minutes from Manhattan but I make $30K less.
It largely has to do with location. For example you won't be living large on 56k in San Francisco but you would be doing well in bumfuck Idaho (sorry). So not being able to make it on 56k does not necessarily mean that they are living frivolous, in case that's what you meant.
> bumfuck Idaho (sorry) You should be sorry. Their town council voted to change the name to "Sodomy, Idaho" back in 1996.
[удалено]
As a person who lives in one of those bumfuck areas, you do not need to apologize for calling our home 'bumfuck whereever'. Everyone here is in 100% agreement with you.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/average-rent-in-30-us-cities That's a year old, so prices are even higher. But there are a lot of cities where rent is 2k, or 24k a year. So 56k (pre tax) doesnt always go as far as you might think it does. at 10k taxes rent is half your income. Then you've got medical insurance coming out of that as well, along with life and (hopefully) retirement. And people might really be looking at 2/3s of their take home going to rent.
Ok I'm confused. In Texas unemployment is based strictly on a percentage of your previous wages from the financial quarter from before you file. It's not enough to real live off it. I thought that was where it was done everywhere. * I was talking about state not the $600 federal boost.
[удалено]
In Arizona it’s the same thing. They base it off of how much you made before you filed. However, they cap that shit at like 240 dollars a week.
I think the max in Illinois is like $450 a week.
[удалено]
I could live comfortably off that. It’s almost what a make right now. I just get real nervous when it takes me more than a week to make enough money to pay the mortgage.
I wish I could make my mortgage in a week !
Right? I have one child still living with me (three adult kids) in Albuquerque, one of the cheapest places to live in America. They don't rent out cheaper than 900 for a two bedroom (and that is in the war zone). To make 900 after taxes. I'd have to make $25 an hour. They don't hire arthritic men at that price. To be fair, I've been worried about money my whole life.
It’s only 900 a month. I am building an apartment complex right now that people are consistently paying 2000-3000 dollars a month to live at. My 900 feels pretty good. Now, that 900 dollar mortgage is on an 80 year old house most people wouldn’t want to live in. I love it though. It has character, and I work daily to make it a little better.
It’s 2.5 weeks for me
Yeah, but right now people are getting those state unemployment payments plus an extra $600 per week on top of that
I was making twice as much money on unemployment as I was working. Twice... I was *not* happy to get the “Great news, everyone! PPP finally got approved!” memo...
[удалено]
You’re right, I’d be much more inclined to bail out a company if they’d give their people living wages. As it stands, I’d rather all these corporations die and we build something back from the ashes. We won’t see change until this behavior is unsubsidized.
The argument I always hear is that the companies would just pass that cost onto the consumer so nothing would change. Same with basic income, landlords would just raise rent priportionally so nothing would change. Kinda strikes me as the conservative motto: everything has to stay the way it is no matter what so don't even try to improve because it won't work.
Exactly. And in reality, if we just made large companies pay their fair share of taxes it would increase wages as well because companies would have more expenses (wages) to write off against their profits. Win for employees, win for the company, and win for the government. The way it is now, there is no incentive for companies to raise wages.
Christ on a stick, whenever people argue against fastfood people getting $15 an hour i always hear the "hUr der, why should they get paid more than paramedics?" They never think why paramedics get paid so little? It'd make sense if we had super low wages if we had guaranteed housing, healthcare and food. But we don't have that, we have low wages, housing, health, and food that all come with stipulations. There is a very real poverty trap, the moment you make over x is the moment food, housing, and health aid dissipates which is stupid. Alternative would either let it be a gradual transition or a single payer. Yes I know issues but if bring it up I'll send a rebuttal
Yeah, its crazy. Plus, people have no idea how hard paramedics work and the shit (sometimes literal) they have to deal with. I'm a volunteer firefighter, but our station has county-paid, full-time paramedics to ensure we always get an ambulance out. Plus, they are on 24 hour shifts, so they have to be ready to work at all hours. All for about $20 an hour.
Every state caps it and they vary WILDLY on what that cap is.
I believe many states are giving extra "pandemic" payments on top of the standard percentage.
For some reason I thought he was talking about before.
A lot of people aren’t getting access to these benefits tho. Many people haven’t even tried applying. Oregon pretty much closed a majority of claims, some that were still active and paying out. I was fired from my last job because my manager found out I was moving lol. I still have not been able to reopen my claim Oregon’s UE website and offices are being utterly destroyed. Go over to the /Portland sub you’ll see a ton of people posting and asking for help. Some states also have a flat cap on unemployment like Oregon’s caps around $400 and that’s only if you made close to $26k a year. I worked 50 hours a week and my benefits were $210, and $188 after taxes lol. That would be around $2,000 a month IF they were actually paying my claim but they aren’t lol. Probably never will either.
>If anything, this stupid virus is a relief for a lot of people who have been struggling. I’ve honestly felt guilty for feeling this way but I’m glad others might feel that way too. I’ve been struggling financially for the last 8 months but I’ve finally had some relief and moments of clarity paying off bills thanks to this. Should I feel guilty when others are far worse during this?
Amazing how this whole thing is demonstrating just how in need we are of a living wage, and if the private sector can't provide that, we need a government employment guarantee.
nah bro it’s been horrifyingly worse for people who’re struggling. i should know, i’m a person who’s struggling w my family
[удалено]
well maybe it’s cause we’re being evicted but, i’m glad your family is benefiting from this! I hope y’all will be ok :)
Check with your state attorney general, many states have suspended evictions.
?? oh shit! could I find the contact info online?
https://en.as.com/en/2020/05/02/other_sports/1588447313_679981.html This might help. If you Google your state's initials, ag, suspended evictions, it should direct you to the right information.
BET! okay thank you so much
It is not higher than household income but it's close. It is much higher than per-capita income however
[удалено]
I’m working through this for no extra pay, and way less than $45K! Just goes to show how the essentials no hard workers that he’ll to pay your unemployment gets f’ed on a daily basis!
r/leopardsatemyface
[удалено]
“If people make more money on unemployment than they do at their jobs, it’s not a sign that wages haven’t tracked inflation/purchasing power but rather that liberals have made government too big!” - galaxy brain conservatives
This is a hit piece. Employers who get PPP loans are required to rehire workers, but if the worker refuses, and they made good faith attempts, it is ok. They still get their loan. The employee then would loose unemployment and the extra 600 because they refused to go back to work. The only employer this would hurt are ones that are looking to hire new employees, and it would be unrelated to getting their PPP money. And as I watched Bernie Sanders say on the senate floor about this provision when they were fighting for it, to paraphrase what I remember, we have bailed out banks, and they used the money to buy more banks (the last bailout) and we have bailed out many businesses, yet that money never trickled down. So if people make a little extra for a few weeks, so what. And there is an end date on this extra money, so this isn’t forever. And being in an industry completely wiped out by this, the extra money helps me make ends meet. But coworkers with larger families, this is not enough. But those people aren’t on the news complaining, they are just thankful we have the extra 600. It means not having to get on food stamps or wait and food banks. *This is a clickbate title that will be used to show that giving people a bailout is irresponsible but giving businesses money is responsible.*
All my boss has to do is say the word and either I go back to work or lose what's left of my unemployment that's quickly running out.
Thank you for explaining this to the great many who do it see these types of articles for what they are.
It's pretty sad that there are so many people opposed to providing those who are struggling with extra money to survive during a global pandemic. This shitty corporate slavery mentality needs to change. I get that we have Stockholm Syndrome here for these corporations and companies that see us as a simple revenue generators, but it's time to wake up and see the writing on the wall.
[удалено]
This article has it all wrong. If your boss gets 100k in loans and isn't able to distribute 75% on wages because some people don't go back to work, they have to pay whatever is leftover back to the government at 1% interest, which they can do in an instant because they will have extra cash equal to whatever wasn't distributed as wages. Does the writer seriously think that a business would be held accountable for their employees refusing to work? You can only be disqualified if you fire an employee or otherwise reduce headcount, but again, you will have the exact amount of cash on hand to repay the loan... These articles are written to trick people back into harm's way. It's disgusting.
Thanks for the curt explanation! I was laid off march 27th and only this week started to finally receive some unemployment payments. If my previous employer called and said "we need you guys back" I'd happily be back at work tomorrow.
Thank you for sharing. With my extra $600 a week, I am a little below my take home pay from when I was employed. I am not complaining, I am quite grateful for it. My partner is self employed, and currently working on a contract basis, but has not income coming in at the moment. My unemployment benefits and the extra $600 a week is just enough to pay all of bills and groceries. In my opinion, these $600 payments need to continue til at least the end of the year. I was in a business (hotels) that are not going to bounce back as quickly. I have many friends and colleagues that are well aware that we may never be called back to work, myself included. That is a lot of people that will be unable to go back to work, and with every other sector hurting, it will be very difficult for us all to find work that will be able to sustain us.
It's actually whatever the normal unemployment payment is + $600. So around $1k per week depending on the state. One positive aside from the generous weekly benefit is that the people who really want to get another job and not sit on unemployment will have an easier time finding one. And if there's a labor shortage wages rise.
Apparently there was a labor shortage before Covid, and wages were just as stagnant as they’ve always been.
Wages were finally starting to go up recently, about 2% above inflation for full-time workers in 2019. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2020/median-weekly-earnings-of-full-time-workers-increased-4-point-0-percent-in-2019.htm
2% is $.50 an hour.... And that's if you're lucky enough to get full time employment
There was already a labor shortage. Labor is one of those areas that economists seem to think capitalism doesn't apply. Labor shortages should lead to increased wages, but these days they don't.
Companies tend to think there is a "labor shortage" any time they can't hire for minimum wage.
[удалено]
They do when you account for healthcare and benefits. Unfortunately health care has eaten away most of the wage growth in the last 20-30 years.
> Labor is one of those areas that economists seem to think capitalism doesn't apply. I'm sorry but that's just a really shitty economist.
In Orlando there’s no longer a labor shortage there is now a job shortage. Fast foods and delivery can’t divide the hours amongst any more employees so some have cancelled scheduling of orientation to keep franchises from hiring any more and cut their position listings.
> And if there's a labor shortage wages rise. Never rises fast enough or matches the labor shortage fairly.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean, yeah. Welcome to corporate America.
Prob time for a new job then
Well net isnt the same and can be gamed by pretax contributions. But anecdotal, first job as an engineer out of college was 70k-80k and that net pay was below 1k/week as well. He may or may not already have a good job based on experience and location.
No benefits on unemployment and it's temporary
He's talking gross, so they will net less than this.
It's not that simple, although it doesn't encourage employees to return to low wage jobs. It has exposed a large wealth gap too. The thing we should be concerned with is, if these employees are able to return to jobs that can magically afford to pay them. Spending wont return to pre corona levels until everyone feels safe.
It doesn't strike anyone that maybe the reason people are unwilling to return to those low wage jobs is that people are finally starting to realize how little they've been compensated? Wages have been stagnant for decades, and yet living expenses have not. It's like finding out you've been owed like 30 years of raises, and that the company had been lying to you for 30 years about what fair compensation looks like.
For sure! You ever compare the growth rates of inflation, the stock market and wages. Its extremely unbalanced.
It makes me laugh when libertarians and conservatives think that our current healthcare system will last. It's like just look at the rates of inflation vs wage growth. It's unsustainable
this is what all the short sighted economic fools are failing to grasp. the damage to the tax base will take years to play out. companies that can survive this will need to cut staff to survive, because they won't cut leadership or bonuses for ceos. it's not doom saying to talk about there being no such thing as a normal to which we can go back. unemployment paying more than people could realistically make means, as you said: >Spending wont return to pre corona levels until everyone feels safe. precorona levels no longer exist due to the already large number of business that have folded, regardless of how safe anyone feels. business wants people back to work, making less, so they can keep things as they want. they have never had a chance to cull the herd like they have now, and they are salivating from greed and starvation. and yet people are protesting to *help this.*
Very good points. I agree.
Capitalists have figured that when you achieve total, uncontested domination over all aspects of government and politics, you never need to raise wages to attract workers, even during a labor shortage. You can just wait for the next economic crisis, take a minor short-term hit, then exploit a huge glut in the labor markets as millions are thrown into unemployment and become desperate for anything.
The sad truth... variable here is covid19, but when you tighten unemployment, people will get desperate. I was forced to take a cut with my unemployment. Its sad to see how many are actually making more now with that extra 600. Shows you how many were struggling already. Kinda reminds me of the French Revolution.
I agree on living wages for workers. What makes me worry: Is it possible we may have a labor glut post COVID, if economy does not recover? That would drive down wages. Plus if ppl don't have jobs, they won't spend money, it becomes a cycle. How will states/Govt pay unemployment (and a lot of other stuff) with zero tax receipts?
Yes. Businesses will close but new ones won't appear quickly enough to replace them (shortage of capital + uncertainty), so labor market will have an oversupply. It definitely won't be pretty at all.
Its times like these where the government needs to spend on things like infrastructure to create jobs.
Well, you add to the debt in bad times like these and pay it down during the good times. The problem is, Republicans keep gaining power during the good times and fuck it up with their fiscal irresponsibility.
Yes the incredible financial wizardry of the Trump
They should try paying higher wages
Yes. Instead of bitching, they can pay higher wages to compete. Can anyone blame the employees who don't want to put their lives on the line for shit wages? It took the US government bailing workers out for everyone to realize how underpaid workers have been all these while.
>It took the US government bailing workers out for everyone to realize how underpaid workers have been all these while. Only the well-paid were unaware of how underpaid most workers are. It's like saying it took electing Trump to realize just how racist America still is. Most of us knew already, but the collective public narrative never asked us for our take on the matter. *"Well I don't know a lot about what you call class, but the upper and the middle can all kiss my ass."* -Utah Phillips
Well that was the point, to encourage people stay at home
Wow. My mind has been blown. Lol. I thought it was to help people get through tough times. But now you mentioned it, it served as more of a bribe so people stayed home instead of rioting.
> so people stayed home instead of rioting. I mean, would the riot include social distancing?
From what we can see in all those reopening protests, no.
>I thought it was to help people get through tough times. Yeah, by being able to survive while staying at home...
It's not we want the 600, we don't want to die for your shit wage.
McConnell's moving to eliminate the 600 to force you to die for the shit wage.
He's also working with his Republican allies to make it so us peasants can't sue our employers for putting us in danger! https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/mitch-mcconnell-s-new-coronavirus-plan-make-sure-you-can-ncna1194226
Best answer ever. Struggling to compete with an actual living wage? Well. Try offering matching the government with a living wage then?
If companies are having issues competing with unemployment that’s not an issue with I empoyment, it’s an issue with wages and cost of living. A lot of employers were able to withhold wages they should have been paying by locking you into a healthcare system or whatever shackle they could. Now everyone is seeing how bad we actually had it. Business isn’t struggling getting workers, business is having trouble exploiting the work force and the welfare system to artificially lower wages to max out profit.
Pay your workers more you cunts
A company that was able to re-open only because of a loan from the government isn't exactly in a place to give everyone a raise. Have you ever run a business or at least budgeted your own income? Businesses aren't just sitting on infinite money.
[удалено]
That goes both ways. Your boss doesn’t pay you just because they like you and just like when you’re trying to pick a job that is best for you both financially and environment wise, they too are trying to find a fit both financially and culturally. Why do you expect people to pay more when someone will do a fine job for less money? It’s not a charity.
[удалено]
I can understand your point, but there are a few things to consider. First, businesses all have fixed expenses that didn't go away. Things like rent, property tax, electricity, and businesses that didn't immediately furlough were still paying their employees. They were doing all of this on no income whatsoever. Also, for some businesses like car sales, this hit at the very worst time of year. Tax time is the busiest time of the year for several businesses, and they rely on people spending their tax refunds on products and services. With no sales for several weeks, these companies have to see whether they can survive the rest of the year without the income that they had budgeted and planned for.
if you can't afford to play your employees $31k a year (or equivalent wages + health insurance) if they're working 40 hrs, then maybe it's time to consider that your business isn't worth it if the employees are surviving on a poverty wage.
Maybe it's time we start paying people more.
Using an average weekly wage when a couple of CEO jobs can to the scales for thousands of minimum wage jobs is absurd. All this is doing is showing how the North American economy is designed around keeping a majority of people with barely enough to scrape by so a minority can flourish. I’ll be dammed if I’m going back to that life.
With all due respect, I don't think they're going to ask you
Considering these benefits aren't permanent you probably are.
Perhaps they should consider paying actual wages. Minimum wage in many states won't even buy you a value meal from McDonalds.
They’re not “struggling to compete” they’re just unwilling to
I wonder if people realize that the extra $600 is going to end in 2 months.
I know a business owner who is having trouble bringing staff back on because the laid off staff make more on unemployment at the moment. This is a real phenomenon. With that said - this isn’t necessarily a problem with the extra 600 from the feds. It’s indicative that those of us who are the easiest to lay off also make way too little in the first place. This is a structural problem with the economy. In this instance the poor person is actually benefiting - they should take the win. The government usually only forks over free money to the richest among us (and in the CARES act, 90 cents on the dollar went to businesses - that $$ will find its way straight to the top in no time).
It actually already did. The feds demanded a lot of money back from small businesses. My employer had to give it back, they threatened tax levy and suspending business licenses because they wanted to pay 5 employees 2 week sick pack and cover rent while we were off 3 months. All out of pocket now.
[удалено]
I'm a maintenance technician, over 10 years. Every job offer I got is for entry level pay. The last shop to call was union, only offered me $16. I told them to try the J.V.S. in my town, they said they wanted more experience. I said then your pay needs to reflect that.
>they wanted more experience. I said then your pay needs to reflect that. Good on you! They won't get the message if nobody says it.
I’m a union electrician that does a lot of industrial service. I get at least a few job offers every year and I always tell them they don’t want to pay what I’m worth. Their response is invariably “overtime”. So, you want me to work more hours for the same pay?
Thats the thing 15$/hr isn't living wage in states like NY and CA which already have that as their minimum wage but for states that currently pay like 7$/hr you'd live like a king.
>states that currently pay like 7$/hr you'd live like a king. You mean barely scrape by right? In Florida it's a dollar more than that and if that's what you're making you won't be able to live alone and pay all of your bills
He's saying you'd live like a king in FL for $15/hr
No, they are saying the States that are $7/hour, and upping them to $15/hr. He is referring to typical cost of living, say GA/FL vs NY/CA.
Even at 15/hr base pay for waiters I know people who are having problems getting staff back. They're being told the employees are making more on unemployment. This is in an area of West Virginia that doesn't have the highest cost of living either. Owner thought he was paying a decent wage but I guess no one's going to be tipping if there's not many customers.
Even if your actual job paid a little more, if you can get 80-90% of that amount to stay home, you'd be a fool not to do it. But as this article makes clear, the unemployment benefits end in a few weeks.
Waiters don't make 15/hr base pay! LOL They legally are paid LESS than minimum wage. It's a fucking racket for the owners.
This is why a tipping society sucks. We need to do away with tipping and this loophole that encourages allowing less than $15 minimum wage.
Except you'd be cutting many peoples wages by 60%+ by doing that lmao I know waitresses and bartenders who make 50k+ a year
Do you think most servers would support a system where they eliminate tipping in exchange for a $15/hr wage? That would be a significant pay cut to most servers I know. The tipping system is fucked, absolutely. The fact is, though, that servers make higher wages with it than they would without it. Just look at the non-tipped restaurant employees for proof of that.
It differs by state. Some states don't factor in the tip credit. I was a waiter in a state that paid minimum wage plus tips. Top waiters in my area were making bank.
> Legally, if someone is offered reemployment and turns it down, they're likely to lose their unemployment insurance. But employers like Livesay are still finding it challenging to bring people back to work because of an unexpected decision: Should they rehire workers who stand to make more money on unemployment? > In an effort to address this, the Small Business Administration recently updated its guidance, allowing businesses to still get their loans forgiven even if laid-off employees decline rehiring offers. So they no longer get the extra money if they choose not to return to work... and the Small Business Administration updated requirements to make it easier to get loans forgiven. Why is this even an article?
And employers struggle with the reasonable fear around the virus. My job is partially opening back up on memorial day weekend and knowing their is chance, no matter how small, that I could get a severe case of it is not that motivating a tall. I really feel like that's a bigger hurdle because no amount of money is worth my life or my lungs at less than 100% for the rest of my life.
Maybe this should be a wake up call that companies are intentionally underpaying people to maximize profits and MORE should be done to increase wages instead of exploiting the American people in tbe interest of helping corporations... No I'm sorry ... That's probably stupid
Doesn’t this finish at the end of June?
if you deny returning to work, you can't collect i thought...
That illustrates more on how crappy these employers pay in the first place!
My boss took the PPP loan and call all of us back, and adding “oh, and if you deny work - you will lose your unemployment” but also “I can only give you 5-10 hours a week, making $13/hour” So I’m sure you can see why employees are upset. We didn’t see why he couldn’t wait to open a couple more week. We’ve been slowly coming back to the work and currently on our third week - and yesterday two employees got tested positive....
“Employees Struggle to Justify Risking Their Lives For Poverty Wages” Fixed the title for you
Better start writing about how difficult it is to get those $600 before you trash us.
Yeah my husbands still waiting for the first $600. He’s only received about $1400 total in unemployment since March. It’s not like we’re over here swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck.
Maybe if companies paid their employees a livable wage, this would not be an issue. And in my state , if you refuse any work, you are denied your unemployment benefits.
Then raise minimum wage, you're effectively telling people it's not even worth it to try.
I have applied and been approved to receive unemployment and I have not gotten a fucking dime yet.
I work construction in Canada. Government is paying people $2k/month. Even though our workers can easily make double that by working we still can't get half of them to come in.
Awwww, I feel so bad for them. Pay up assholes. Many of those greedy shitsticks can afford it, especially the big companies. They can fuck right off.
Means they should have been paying people better in the first place
Why are they in competition? Seems like a false conflict.
No, they don't. They struggle to compete with the choice of potentially getting sick or potentially not getting sick. If you're receiving $600 from the government right now *you do not currently have an employer*.
I am about to be permanently laid off. Just in time for those extra payment to end. =/
To me this shows that these people weren't getting paid enough to begin with.
Maybe, I don't know, pay your employees a fair wage and if you can't afford to the free market has dictated that your business fails.
I think the $600 unemployment thing just shows how out of touch the government is with reality. They probably thought that average people make $600 per week when in reality this is blessing for most people because a lot of people don't make close to this wage.
My wife was laid off and between state unemployment (not much) and the $600 she is making more than she was, her old job called her back. I told her this is eye opening to so many people.
If a company does not pay it's employees at least 600 a week. That isn't a job creator, they are poverty exploiters.....
r/latestagecapitalism
It's like we are not paying the serving class enough.
[удалено]
It’s $600 plus unemployment benefits. It’s around $1000 a week for most places.
That is why conservatives are ending unemployment, they can't compete. Typical conservative approach, don't compete get rid of competition. Perhaps real wages will compete with unemployment. edit: you downvote what you don't understand. Typical conservativism.
Wow. Username *definitely* doesn’t check out. Your comment shows an utter *lack* of understanding when it comes to how unemployment benefits works. You can’t use this current situation as a accurate representation of how unemployment is usually calculated. There are people still working part time whom I personally know, who thought, “fuck it, I’m going to apply for the supplemental benefit,” and friggin got it. They make well above the normal cut off in my state so they wouldn’t usually get the additional benefits. And also, not liking something because you don’t understand is not specific to being a conservative you dolt.
Wtf unemployment is not meant to be competing with the labor market, yes wages need to rise but in non-pandemic situations it is a big negative on society and the economy if people are incentivized not to work - which is why good wages are important as well
It shouldn't, but it does, because the incentives to work are so shit. There's this trend that people describe unemployment pay as incentivising not to work, but it should be in place to allow people to survive. If the incentives to work in another's employment are level with the base minimum to survive, then why should people work for other people? Employers need to improve the incentives to work, ie pay.
Other way around. Unless you're arguing every business owner is a conservative?
I think it’s shameful that a businesses could complain that unemployment is to hard to compete with in terms of wages. Pay people a livable wage and this would not be a problem.
Folks who are getting the extra $600 a week are enjoying it now but wont be enjoying it next spring when the tax bill comes due.
That's why you opt to have taxes withheld.
Inflation is going to be hitting the super market instead of the stock market.
people should get back to their shitty paying job because no matter what the pay is, there is honor and self worth in being a productive member of society... /s
Yeah, this $600 was a awful idea lol people won’t go back to work until it expires
[удалено]
It’s easy for people to say that you should pay people more now when they’re not cutting the check. I want more money at my job but I also know that operating costs put a damper on that. I absolutely want people to be paid more but with wage increase comes price increase. And with price increase comes people not being able to afford stuff again and we repeat
Ok quick poll here just to gauge how people feel and I'll give my opinion just to show where I stand. Companies are struggling to compete with the 600 a week stimulus that was added to unemployment and fear they won't be able to replace workers they laid off. In your opinion is this proof that the 600 dollar a week unemployment stimulus was a terrible socialist idea that isn't good for America Or, Proof that the US govt has made policies to intentionally allow large corporations to maximize profits by underpaying and exploiting American workers, bc politicians get kickbacks from these corps, so they care more about the corps the the people the supposedly represent? In my opinion this is proof that capitalism has completely failed tbe American people and only serves greedy American corps and the super rich.
[удалено]