I think people are judging pretty quickly here when the intent of what the government is doing is to define suitable jobs and define resonable effort to find work. Two things that have been a drag on EI for a long time.
I don't think that the expectation that a nurse needs to clean out a condom shredding machine at a water treatment plant. or a 98 pound computer programmer is going to need to go work at a construction site working a jack hammer.
I think that Flarehty probably mispoke a bit, but the opposition took that ball and ran.
However to me they do have to look at how reasonable is the persons effort to get off of EI and find a job, and is he refusing a job that might be a little junior or a bit outside of his normal zone of comfort because he wants a dream job?
Well we can only go by what he said. If you have any additional information that leads you to believe he misspoke, feel free to share it and clear up the misunderstanding.
And "the opposition took that ball and ran?" I haven't seen any opposition posting here, just people wondering what he means and relaying the fact that yes, there are some pretty crappy jobs. Myself, I sold vacuum cleaners door to door, manually collated coupons for a coupon book, and worked for a dead stock removal company. There are some really (REALLY) bad jobs.
I agree that you shouldn't jump to conclusions, but to make a statement like that and then not explain how they are looking at implementing such a policy is just asking for doomsayers to fill in the missing information.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
Out of curiosity, anyone know what percentage of EI payments are for maternity and parental leave?
I don't know the actual percentages but here is a quick calculation I did to realize the extent of these expesnses.
My wife and I contribute the max to EI each year about $800 a year and the employer roughly matches it for a total of $3200 per year into EI. You get about $900 every two weeks on EI. We had 2 kids so received 46,800 from the governement for EI.
If you divide that by the $3200 per year that we are contributing it will take 15 years to pay for the EI benefits I recieved. I don't plan on working more than about 35 years so about 40% of mine and my wifes EI contribution will have gone towards Maternaty benefits.
Now this doesn't take into account the whole picture but I would bet at least 25% of the costs are Mat leave related.
Well we can only go by what he said. If you have any additional information that leads you to believe he misspoke, feel free to share it and clear up the misunderstanding.
For additional information you have perhaps read the article where he goes on to say
Quote:
We need to get rid of disincentives in the employment insurance system to people joining the workforce.
It all really depends of the company of course. But large corporations and multi-nationals are driven by keeping variable costs (I.E. labor) down as much as possible. I worked for Liquor Depot (ugh), and they really didn't value their employees or management very much. Some corporations do very much value their employees, but I've found that its rare. They view the jobs as easy enough that employees are disposable (not fireable, rather they can afford to lose people and can replace them with comparable help).
I'll also add I really enjoy doing retail management and would agree it has a great benefit in the long run. Managing people in an environment where quite frankly most of them could care less about the job is a real challenge, and at least in my experience, working within a strict budget and still trying to make a store profitable is quite the challenge and a worthwhile one if you can make it work.
I don't think it has anything to do with large or small corporations but rather with level of responsibility. As a store manager, how many employees are working for the store, how complicated is the ordering, scheduling, supervision, and maintenance. Even responsibility level will vary between companies. Some have a very formulaic approach that tells you exactly what to order, how to schedule and so on while other companies merely have targets that you have to meet.
My point though was that you can start out managing a smaller store like a Liquor Depot and translate those skills into say a department manager job at a Walmart and from there you can apply to be a store manager at a Sport Mart. Moving up in responsibility and pay as you go.
It is definitely a career if you make it one.
The Following User Says Thank You to GP_Matt For This Useful Post:
Should a person be happy to accept a job that earns less $ money than EI provides?
EI isn't an eternal gift for the unemployed.
Its essentially a stop gap measure. A bridge. You paid into it - or you will in the future - and in a critical moment, you can benefit from those savings. The understanding is always there that it ends at some point and what you do in making use of your time before the end point is up to you. I'm very much in favour of EI in that context.
I worked picking rocks out of a field by hand on hot, dusty July days. I installed asbestos, before it was a bad thing, for a lying, crap boss. You plow ahead and overcome the obstacles.
But nobody owes you a perpetual living.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Cowperson For This Useful Post:
For additional information you have perhaps read the article where he goes on to say
No, I saw it, and think I know what the Finance minister is trying to do. And I agree there are some people who need to be more flexible in what they will consider for employment.
But the problem with more rules is they often have unintended effects and I can see something attempting to force people back into the workforce leading to people who still need the help being cut off from benefits.
I just don't see how you can create this type of a policy that achieves its end goals without being either unnecessarily broad or so complicated the costs of administration will usurp any potential gains.
The intention is fine, but we know the saying about good intentions.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
The Following User Says Thank You to Bobblehead For This Useful Post:
I don't think it has anything to do with large or small corporations but rather with level of responsibility. As a store manager, how many employees are working for the store, how complicated is the ordering, scheduling, supervision, and maintenance. Even responsibility level will vary between companies. Some have a very formulaic approach that tells you exactly what to order, how to schedule and so on while other companies merely have targets that you have to meet.
My point though was that you can start out managing a smaller store like a Liquor Depot and translate those skills into say a department manager job at a Walmart and from there you can apply to be a store manager at a Sport Mart. Moving up in responsibility and pay as you go.
It is definitely a career if you make it one.
So because I could have made a career in retail management, I should have not worried about my 4 year degree I just finished getting and got a job at Liquor Depot in the hopes that one day the job of the people above me will be crappy enough that they will quit and then I can have it?
Where do I sign up?
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
So because I could have made a career in retail management, I should have not worried about my 4 year degree I just finished getting and got a job at Liquor Depot in the hopes that one day the job of the people above me will be crappy enough that they will quit and then I can have it?
Where do I sign up?
Nobody owes you a job just because you got a 4 year degree.
Signed,
Social Science/Fine Arts Students Everywhere.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to crazy_eoj For This Useful Post:
I don't think it has anything to do with large or small corporations but rather with level of responsibility. As a store manager, how many employees are working for the store, how complicated is the ordering, scheduling, supervision, and maintenance. Even responsibility level will vary between companies. Some have a very formulaic approach that tells you exactly what to order, how to schedule and so on while other companies merely have targets that you have to meet.
My point though was that you can start out managing a smaller store like a Liquor Depot and translate those skills into say a department manager job at a Walmart and from there you can apply to be a store manager at a Sport Mart. Moving up in responsibility and pay as you go.
It is definitely a career if you make it one.
Ahh gotcha, thought you were talking more inter-company growth. Definetely you can use management at one company to grow into a better position at a better company. Interestingly enough, Liqour Depot had a very formulaic approach, which I constantly ignored. Every month they predicted my store would lose money, and it consistently made money. Just goes to show you corporations think they know best, but when you're at store level only you as manager know your store the best.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
So because I could have made a career in retail management, I should have not worried about my 4 year degree I just finished getting and got a job at Liquor Depot in the hopes that one day the job of the people above me will be crappy enough that they will quit and then I can have it?
Where do I sign up?
What you do is entirely up to your decisions and circumstances. My post was in response to the comment that retail was a crappy job.
In terms of the article though, I don't know why someone who is looking for a job in their field can't take on a retail job while looking. Also, I don't think that any of this applies to new grads. I am pretty sure you need to lose a job before you qualify for EI. Graduating from school without a job makes you unemployed but doesn't qualify (at least I think it doesn't) you for EI as far as I know.
Take the "bad" out of that headline and he is exactly right!
So now nurses and teachers and even IT professionals who have the sheer nerve to want to find work in the fields that they racked up huge debt to go to university for, are being told to take crappy retail jobs? Fantastic! This will really "save the economy"!!!
No, they are being told to find other jobs if their only alternative is to perpetually leech off the public purse because they can't get a job in their field at this time. While I've been lucky to have consistent employment in my field since graduating, I know plenty of people who had to take bridge jobs before they landed in their field of choice.
Its essentially a stop gap measure. A bridge. You paid into it - or you will in the future - and in a critical moment, you can benefit from those savings. The understanding is always there that it ends at some point and what you do in making use of your time before the end point is up to you. I'm very much in favour of EI in that context.
I worked picking rocks out of a field by hand on hot, dusty July days. I installed asbestos, before it was a bad thing, for a lying, crap boss. You plow ahead and overcome the obstacles.
But nobody owes you a perpetual living.
Cowperson
I guess what I was getting at was, if I'm newly unemployed and am looking for a new position, what is my incentive to work at a fast food place for less than EI? I could alternatively, get on EI (I think it maxes at 6 months?) and devote my time to finding a different position. I agree that nobody owes you a job, but simply finding a job can be a full time job. Why would I reduce the amount of time I can spend searching for a job by working at a place that gives me less money than EI?
Also, it's easier said than done to find any ol' job the more advanced your degree is. When I was between jobs, I had a hell of a time finding anything during the recent slump. I was either over or under qualified for everything (perceived or real qualifications have the same effect). At one point, I was applying for almost any position under the sun to no avail. Ultimately, the stars aligned and I found a good position but it took a very long time.
Something everyone is forgetting to mention is the apparent labour shortage that already exists and will continue to exist and be a problem in the foreseeable future. Obviously most of those jobs are labour intensive, but life isn't always handed to you on a silver spoon.
If you apply for every single job out there and nothing works for the time being, collecting EI shouldn't be a problem. The problem is when people collect EI without even attempting to find work because the work that is available isn't something they WANT to do.
Just browsing through the job search websites, there are a ton of different kinds of jobs available. From a store manager at 7-11 to a senior developer for Microsoft. So there is work out there, but obviously people are being extremely picky about what they do considering that the unemployment numbers aren't really moving despite record amounts of jobs being created the past few months.
a 4 year degree doesn't guarantee a job within that field.
That's especially true in certain programs.
Hence, get a real job. Or take a real program. But holding out for a dream job with your masters in comparitve literature is ridiculous.
I know that certain kids might be interested in the arts, but I find it a bit strange that someone would major in it, when getting an engineering or comparable degree is pretty much a guarantee to land you a job in Alberta.
I know that certain kids might be interested in the arts, but I find it a bit strange that someone would major in it, when getting an engineering or comparable degree is pretty much a guarantee to land you a job in Alberta.
Certainly not Alberta focused, but I think it's representative of many:
There are no bad jobs? Tell that to my friend working nights at the water treatment plant when he has his head up the condom shredding machine trying to unplug it for the third time.
