The Christian Science Monitor published a story on Tuesday about the difficult choice for the unemployed to either find work or stay unemployed. If someone decides to get a part-time job, then they will lose their unemployed benefits based on a recalculating system that is used. The impression that the unemployed has is that they’re better off being unemployed than pick up part-time work.
An example of how states recalculate the amount of benefits you can receive is displayed here:
Connecticut’s formula for part-time workers is to take two-thirds of their gross salary (in her case $130 a week, which is $87) and subtract that amount from $39, which would be her weekly benefit based on the part-time job. This gives her a negative $48, or no benefit at all.
It has been said in numerous networking circles that if your unemployment benefits is about to expire, you can continue to call in and your benefits will be extended while you are finding full-time work. So, should you call in your part-time earnings for fear of losing your unemployment benefit all together?
The thought of telling someone who is seeking work that it’s better not to get part-time work and sit at home is a blow to the psyche to those who want to get back on their feet. Currently, the number of full-time jobs are at a premium, and yet a number of part-time jobs are popping up. The part-time work may not help cover most things, but mentally, it gives people a self-esteem boost. It puts them back on their feet and doing something.
What do those who are unemployed and seeking work feel about this story? Do you think it’s unfair that you could lose any or all of your unemployment if you take a 3-hour barista gig at Java Joe’s twice a week?