43
Opposition voiced to legislation that would decrease unemployment benefits
By Marc Kovac
COLUMBUS
Union groups, advocates for the poor and others voiced opposition Tuesday to legislation that would decrease unemployment benefits, as part of the state’s efforts to ensure the future solvency of the jobless assistance program.
Fewer weeks of unemployment checks, they told the Ohio House’s Insurance Committee, would hurt households in times when there are no jobs to be found.
“You must understand that there are many other families like mine who are not lazy or trying to freeload off the system,” said Kenyetta Jones, a 30-year GM employee from Toledo who had to rely on unemployment benefits for more than a dozen months during the 2009 recession. “We do not fail the system, and therefore we do not want the system to fail us. I understand that changes need to be made but not to the point whereas working people will be worse off than before. We cannot force employers to hire us, and the fact that you want to pass a bill that will cut benefits will not make employers hire us any sooner.”
Jones provided opponent testimony for House Bill 394, an unemployment-reform package that’s been moving rapidly through the House but likely won’t be up for a floor vote before the end of the year.
Rep. Barbara Sears of Toledo, a Republican and primary sponsor of the bill, said the proposed law changes are needed to ensure Ohio is better positioned to handle an economic downturn.
The state was not prepared for the last recession, she testified last month, and ended up borrowing $1.6 billion from the federal government to meet its unemployment-compensation obligations.
The state still owes nearly $775 million and is expected to pay off the debt in about two years.
In the meantime, HB 394 would address some of the issues that led to the debt in the first place.
“Each year as the benefits increase, the ability to reduce the debt is lessened,” Sears said. “Because Ohio is 22nd-consecutive month under the national average with a current unemployment rate of 4.5 percent, now is the time to make the structural changes necessary to prepare Ohio for the next downturn in the economy.”
Among other provisions, the bill potentially would freeze unemployment-benefit amounts and reduce the maximum number of weeks eligible residents could receive compensation.
The latter would be based on unemployment rates. For example, a 5.5 percent or lower rate would cap benefits at 12 weeks, with increasing assistance as rates rise. A 9 percent or greater rate would mean 20 weeks of benefits, according to an analysis by the state’s Legislative Service Commission.
“At a high unemployment like we were at in ’09, we would have been at 20 weeks,” Sears said Tuesday. “In addition to that, the federal government came in and added the extra weeks all the way up to 99 weeks.”
The bill also would require workers to have earned wages in at least three of four calendar quarters to be eligible for unemployment benefits.
Additionally, HB 394 would remove “lockout” exemptions, blocking benefits for workers in the midst of labor disputes. And it would require additional “waiting weeks,” where unemployment-compensation seekers would have to meet eligibility requirements while not receiving benefits.
Doug Holmes, president of a national group that focuses on unemployment insurance and workers’-compensation policy issues and a proponent of the legislation, told lawmakers earlier this month that HB 394 was a “thoughtful, serious, well-reasoned and balanced approach” to addressing solvency issues in the state’s unemployment trust fund.