FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Posted on 06/11/2002 2:14:27 PM PDT by nicholle
For 100,000 Without Jobs, Time and Aid Are Almost Up By LESLIE EATON
ver the next two weeks, as many as 100,000 jobless New Yorkers will lose their economic lifeline: temporary unemployment benefits.
Congress created the benefits in March to help unemployed workers who had used up six months of regular state unemployment payments and had not found a job. The federally financed program gave them an additional 13 weeks of benefits.
But for the first New Yorkers who signed up for the program — 100,300, according to federal data — those 13 weeks are almost up. New York has the largest number of people coming off the rolls but, unlike other economically depressed states, including California, it does not qualify for an additional federal extension that gives the unemployed up to a year of payments.
The prospect of thousands of unemployed New Yorkers suddenly losing their income is alarming food banks and social service agencies, and concerning economists who track the region. It has caught the attention of some lawmakers in Albany. And it promises to become an issue in the state's gubernatorial race.
But the people most deeply concerned about the loss of benefits are the unemployed themselves, people like Miriam Engstrom of Queens. Mrs. Engstrom, who worked in the Internet division of a financial firm, has been jobless for a year, despite a diligent search and a willingness to take pretty much any job.
She said that like many of her friends in their 30's, 40's and 50's, she has been living off her savings and unemployment insurance payments, which will run out within weeks.
"We've always saved for a rainy day, but I think this could very well go into next year," she said. "Then what?"
Congress created the unemployment insurance system after the Great Depression, to help people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. The regular programs are run by each state and financed by taxes on employers; in New York, the unemployed receive a maximum of $405 a week for up to 26 weeks.
But during recessions, Congress has often created a temporary, emergency unemployment insurance program, as it did in March. That program gave 13 weeks of federally financed benefits to the jobless in every state.
In New York, 137,000 people are now enrolled in the temporary plan. A State Department of Labor spokesman, Robert M. Lillpopp, said officials believed that at least some people who signed up for temporary benefits eventually found jobs, but he added that they did not now how many.
Roughly 191,000 people are receiving regular benefits and will be eligible for the temporary program if they exhaust them. Half of the New Yorkers who go on unemployment have been exhausting their benefits this year, according to data from the federal Department of Labor.
Congress also said states could become eligible for 13 more weeks, but only if the number of people receiving unemployment benefits rises sharply and averages 4 percent of the labor force.
In Oregon, which got the second extension, the "insured unemployment rate" is 4.7 percent and the regular unemployment rate has been about 7.8 percent.
In New York State, by contrast, the unemployment rate is 6.1 percent and 3.3 percent of the labor force is receiving unemployment, according to the federal Department of Labor. State officials do not think it will go high enough to qualify for an extension, Mr. Lillpopp said.
Unemployment in New York is heavily concentrated in New York City, where in April the unemployment rate rose to 7.7 percent, after seasonal adjustments. But in the rest of the state, the rate is just 5 percent, significantly below the national average, 6 percent.
Congress is unlikely to come to the rescue of unemployed workers in states that do not qualify for the automatic extension, said Wendell Primus, director of income security for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington research group. One reason is that in May, the states received $8 billion from the federal unemployment fund, money that could be used to extend benefits.
But New York has spent its share — $491 million — to pay for regular benefits and to repay a $189 million federal loan it took out in January when the unemployment fund ran out of money, Mr. Lillpopp said. Any effort to extend benefits at the state level would "immediately undermine the integrity of the U.I. trust fund, which has already been negatively impacted by Sept. 11," he said.
Employers would also vigorously oppose a state extension, said Matthew Maguire, a spokesman for the Business Council of New York State.
Nevertheless, legislators are working on a bill that would use state money to extend benefits to those who have exhausted the federal program. "We're trying to get our ducks in a line as quickly as possible," said Catherine T. Nolan of Queens, chairwoman of the Assembly's Labor Committee. The legislative session is to end in about a week.
Advocates of a state-financed extension say that New York could spend money now in the fund — about $800 million — take out another loan, or enact a temporary tax increase, as Minnesota did.
"It's a matter of priorities," said Maurice Emsellem, director of public policy at the National Employment Law Project.
Andrew M. Cuomo, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor, said on Friday that he supported an extension, and criticized Gov. George E. Pataki for allowing the unemployment fund's reserves to fall to very low levels during the economic boom. "Since being in office, the governor has done nothing less than mismanage the state's unemployment insurance fund, and the consequences are severe," Mr. Cuomo said in a statement. A spokesman for H. Carl McCall, Mr. Cuomo's Democratic rival, did not respond to a request for comment.
In response to Mr. Cuomo's comments, Mr. Lillpopp said: "Andy sat at the right hand of his father as they drove New York's jobless rate up to 7.8 percent, lost hundreds of thousands of jobs and borrowed more than $715 million for the federal U.I. trust fund in the last two years of their administration alone."
History suggests that people who exhaust their emergency benefits during a recession have a hard row to hoe. In the early 1990's, almost a quarter of those whose benefits ran out were unable to find a job within three years, said Walter Corson, who directed a study of emergency benefits by Mathmatica Policy Research Inc. for the federal Department of Labor.
A study done in 1994 by the New York State Department of Labor after the last recession found that about 6 percent of people whose benefits ran out filed for bankruptcy, and 26 percent said they were receiving some kind of public assistance.
That may well happen again, said Mark Levitan, a senior policy analyst for the Community Service Society of New York. "The first safety net, unemployment insurance, is ripping apart," he said. "Next comes the welfare system."
Food pantries are already experiencing a surge in demand from the unemployed, said Lucy Cabrera, president of Food for Survival, the city food bank. "We're worried about what we're going to be seeing in the next few months," she said.
And the presence of so many workers without income could affect the city's economic recovery, said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Economy.com, a firm that specializes in regional studies. "It suggests that the city's economic adjustment still has a way to go, and that the drag on the economy really hasn't been felt yet," he said, adding that he expected the city's unemployment rate to continue to rise for most of the year.
That's bad news for Krystyna Walter, a consulting engineer who just turned 60 and was laid off Nov. 1. Ms. Walter has about nine weeks of temporary benefits left, but said she would like an additional three months to get through the slow summer hiring months.
"Nothing is happening in the city — this is really scary," she said. "Time is running out extremely fast."
I am having trouble believing this lie
I am being layed off Thursday and for the first time will file for unemployment benefits. How much are they every week? The jobs are so scarce....they want tons of qualifications and they pay nothing!!
The fisherman who fishes in the middle of the river catches fish when the tides flow in, and when they flow out.
If you spend 40 hours a week seriously seeking employment, you should have a job that pays more than unenjoyment insurance within 3 days IMHO
They max out at $396 a week. Before taxes. I've had to sell all my stocks dirt chip(my only saveings), and in two months that will run out and my unemployment will not cover my expenses.
I don't think people with work realize how bad the situation is. A couple of years ago, I could pick and choose a job, get a signing bonus, whatever terms I wanted.
Now it's hard to find even a prospect in our fields.
I have lots of family (also technical) who are also laid off.
I am a computer programmer and I made a pretty good salary. I'm also highly specialized which makes it hard to find a job.
I've found ONE job that I qualified for in my area, and interviewed for it, and today I am told I am in the running. I really hope I get it.
To the people who have unkind words to say to people on unemployment - keep in mind that it's our money.
I had well over six figures in "taxes" stolen from me over the last few years so I have no qualms about takeing this pitance.
You call people liars for being out of work? Perhaps you need a little dose of unemployment yourself. I received an eight month dose of it last year. I have plenty of friends out of work who are quite desperate.
UNEMPLOYED FREEPERS
I pointed out that I went to an open house for a chance at 25 new positions...with the attitude that I was sure I could get one of them. There were over 100 people there easy...(while I was there for that few minutes...more coming all the time)...and when they gave me their questionaire for 'requirements' and how much they pay...I laughed out loud...wow. It is certainly an employers market. I don't expect to get called.
unlax and rewind, the being out of work is not the lie, but the part where it states she was willing to take any job, and still couldnt find one after a year? come on get real!
Nope. In NYC, it is more than beleivable.
No. It's true. The problem is that if you are , say, over 25 or 30 yrs old, have a few years of experience in an actual profession, and a college education, the low-end employers will not hire you. Therefore "taking any job" is not as easy as it seems. You can't "just get" any job.
Warehouse? Assembly? Construction? Fry cook? Clerical?
Route sales? What?
Some don't have a clue...
I'm glad your area still has full employment. Here in Massachusetts that is not the case. I have many talented friends who are out of work - and willing to work for a fraction of what they made on their last job.
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.