Legislation has cleared the Arizona House and is working its way through the Senate that will require an unemployed individual to prove that he was laid off or fired for insufficient reason, rather than quit or was fired for good cause, to be eligible for unemployment benefits.
If passed, this legislation will turn filing for unemployment benefits on its head. Currently, anyone can file, claiming that he was laid off or unjustly fired. His last employer is then notified, and has the option of contesting the claim. The rate an employer pays for unemployment insurance depends on the number of successful unemployment claims filed against him, so it is in the employer's interest to contest claims (and to avoid layoffs in the first place).
Clearly, it is in the interest of the unemployed to claim benefits. Clearly, also, it is in society's interest to limit unemployment paid, partly due to the depressing effect on job creation (the higher an employer's job related costs, like unemployment insurance, the fewer jobs he will create), and also due to the lessening pressure on the unemployed individual to look high and low for a new job - after all, he's being supported. The continuing extension of unemployment benefits, at the national level, seems to have more than a bit to do with the numbers of long term unemployed in our midst. So a balance must be struck.
In well over 30 years, I've never had to lay anyone off - always had enough work for everyone I've got. I have fired, for cause, quite a few; I've also had quite a few quit as a result of disciplinary action due to poor performance. Though it's a bit of a hassle to contest unfair unemployment claims, I've always done so. I don't like to spend my time in paperwork or hearings, but I also don't like the increased insurance rates, as well as the basic unfairness - to me and to society. The idea of putting the shoe on the other foot is appealing.
Comments