Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

back too work or else

Ditch-Runner
I was reading ( well skimming thru ) a article on local news here in Ohio 
 employers can turn in any one on unemployment thet does not want to come back to work for fear of getting sick 
 so after the entire government was shut down  people ordered to stay home avoid people  no shopping no sports no any thing your going to die be afraid be very afraid 
 and now  being fearful of getting sick is not a reason to claim unemployment you work or get kicked off 
 yep same old crap well we changed our mind now get out there >>>>>
                side note we know some one works at a local doctors office they have been flooded with people getting restrictions doctors orders  they can not wear a mask  so no mask no work ,,

0

Comments

14 comments

Date Votes
  • BobJudy
    People can only collect unemployment if fired or laid off, not for quitting or abandoning their jobs. If someone refuses to go back to work because they are either lazy, scared or making more on unemployment how long should they be paid to sit at home? It brings to mind the people collecting disability that are discovered hang gliding or running marathons. Crooked doctors and crooked lawyers make a fortune keeping able bodies people out of work. If called back to work they have a simple choice - work and get paid or stay home and lose unemployment benefits. I know I sound harsh but I think we have to get the economy going again or face a permanent crippling of the economy and therefore the country. Bob
    6
  • Ditch-Runner
     I do not have a dog in the fight I am retired , 
     I just find it typical government  your not allowed to do any thing go any where stay six feet apart and bla bla .....
    now over night get back to work or else , standing shoulder to shoulder touching each other  on a assembly line rotating jobs handing the same tools and parts  sharing the same break area , /lunch rooms and bath rooms  and now its all good don't worry about getting sick just because we  decided its better .
     my humble view it should have never been shut down to start with millions of life's and  countless thousands small business will never recover  
     local county close by us decided  screw the rules we are opening up all the small business the town counsel ,  sheriff , representatives all said were opening up one gal who owned a  hair nail  salon said  if a hundred people can go in Walmart then two or three should be able too  come into my shop  for a hair cut 
    3
  • Horse Plains Drifter
    BobJudy said:
    People can only collect unemployment if fired or laid off, not for quitting or abandoning their jobs. I
    One can get unemployment if you quit a job with just cause. Four times in over the years I have quit jack a s s employers in mid stroke. Every time I prevailed on unemployment. It takes 4-6 weeks to sort it out, but it happens.
    0
  • BobJudy
    BobJudy said:
    People can only collect unemployment if fired or laid off, not for quitting or abandoning their jobs. I
    One can get unemployment if you quit a job with just cause. Four times in over the years I have quit jack a s s employers in mid stroke. Every time I prevailed on unemployment. It takes 4-6 weeks to sort it out, but it happens.
    Well I guess I should have said can't collect with some exceptions. The only experience I have is here in Michigan where I had to show up at the unemployment office for hearings about why I thought an ex employee shouldn't collect. I was successful about 20 times and strangely enough it was the guy I caught selling drugs at work that ended up collecting. He was also a user and the liberal referee said it was a medical problem and that was allowed for collecting unemployment even though he quit. There are other reasons like hostile work environment, sexual harassment and changing some ones schedule to a time they were unable to work. I never had anyone claim those problems so I guess I overlooked them. In the original post I don't believe any of those things would apply either. Bob
    0
  • sxsnuf
    I've been required to work throughout this whole mess. Quite thankful actually that I had a steady paycheck while so many others did not. If my wife (extremely high risk) were required to report for work, she would be able to receive FMLA from her primary care physician. Since she's disabled and doesn't work anyway, I guess that's a moot point.
    Just pointing out that there are ways for those who wish to stay home, to stay home, regardless of employers demands.
    0
  • mjrfd99
    They interviewed a local restaurant owner who wanted to reopen for takeout.
    He said his employees do not want to come back because the extra $600 on top of their UE is more than their usual bring home. 
    Get 'em addicted to the goobermint titty and the minimum wage people realize it's more profitable to stay home.   
    Could that be the rats plan?  It's worked in their destroyed cities.  Without the low life vote the rats RICO gang dies.
    Unemployment in 1933 was 24%   We're headed for 20% this week. Worried about a recession?  Looks like it might pass that and go to depression. 
    Thank the commies.   Ca Gov just signed a deal of 1 BILLION with the commies.  Yeah that's punishing them.
    Say G'nite Gracie.   
    0
  • bpost
    I am not sure what will prove to be a bigger mess.  The China Virus true death toll or the cost to American workers and our way of life.  It seemed odd the feds decided that an extra 600 a week was a great idea.  That made the income more than double for many working Americans for not working. 

    After the dust settles we will find just how bad having Government pick winners and losers really is.
    We live in interesting times for sure.
    0
  • chiefr
    BobJudy said:
    People can only collect unemployment if fired or laid off, not for quitting or abandoning their jobs. If someone refuses to go back to work because they are either lazy, scared or making more on unemployment how long should they be paid to sit at home? It brings to mind the people collecting disability that are discovered hang gliding or running marathons. Crooked doctors and crooked lawyers make a fortune keeping able bodies people out of work. If called back to work they have a simple choice - work and get paid or stay home and lose unemployment benefits. I know I sound harsh but I think we have to get the economy going again or face a permanent crippling of the economy and therefore the country. Bob
    Depends whether or not DEMOCRATs gain or have control.
     DEMOCRATs are adamant on creating a power base of voters totally dependent on voting DEMOCRAT in order to get a paycheck for doing absolutely nothing. The program is called: Universal Basic Income or UBI.

    Certainly UBI will lead to a loss of motivation, an end to capitalism, destruction of the economy resulting in the death of America as founded, but DEMOCRAT dont mind that a bit.

    Do an internet search on UBI for more information. There are a considerable and growing number of DEMOCRATs who support UBI.

       
    0
  • spasmcreeksrun
    and the ONLY way to stop china from winning this economic warfare stroke is to STOP sending  them money for all the chit we should be making in AMERICA...OPEN UP our factories
    0
  • Mobuck
    How the whole thing plays out is dependent on the scenario.  I have an employee who filed for unemployment even though I offered him alternative work. He claimed he couldn't perform that work due to his crappy phone network.  I verified that it was HIS problem but HQ overruled my judgement and the guy's getting paid 3X what the others are getting for doing the work he refused and he's sitting at home playing on his phone.
    0
  • Don McManus
    The individual states should sort out who is eligible for unemployment insurance payments and who is not.  The Federal Government should never have become involved with the weekly bonus money and should let it sunset as planned.  If a State wants to continue to pay a person who refuses to go back to work, it is that state's choice, but the employer should not have it count on his UI rates if the state decides to pay.
    The employer should also have the right to replace the worker without risk of being penalized if that worker decides to come back to work when the federal money sunsets.
    Life is full of risks.  If you are one of those who fear this virus and refuse to come out of hibernation, there will be those that would be happy to take your place at work.  It is the individual's choice, and as with most choices, there will be a cost/benefit analysis that the individual must evaluate.
    0
  • truthful
    What I don't understand is why, during the 1967 flu that killed 100,000 Americans, and the 2017 flu that killed 61,000 Americans, the whole country just kept going as normal through both of those. We were aware that it was a bad flu, so we avoided those obviously ill, and stayed home of we felt sick without some politician telling us to.  If this one is such a crisis, why weren't those? I'm afraid that the answer may be that this one is way over-hyped by the mediacrats in an attempt to influence the November election.
    0
  • Don McManus
    truthful said:
    What I don't understand is why, during the 1967 flu that killed 100,000 Americans, and the 2017 flu that killed 61,000 Americans, the whole country just kept going as normal through both of those. We were aware that it was a bad flu, so we avoided those obviously ill, and stayed home of we felt sick without some politician telling us to.  If this one is such a crisis, why weren't those? I'm afraid that the answer may be that this one is way over-hyped by the mediacrats in an attempt to influence the November election.
    I believe it to be far worse than that, truthful.  While there are no doubt some democrats that are thinking this way, the larger problem is that the average American now believes that it is the role of the Federal Government to protect them from this type of thing.  The vast majority of republicans were also falling over themselves to get as much borrowed money out to the people to help the economy while they advised shelter in place guidance to governors.  There is nothing wrong with the Federal government serving in a coordinating and information sharing capacity, but this should always have been an issue addressed at the local level, as the impact varies tremendously through different demographic groups and population densities.
    My greatest fear is that we have learned the wrong lessons from our response.  Re-opening plans already are calling for a return to isolation if case rates increase.  
    The cynical side of me thinks that if the same total number of deaths were spread out among the entire population rather than those of us in our twilight years, the response would not have been nearly as extreme.  Those that are vulnerable, the older folks, are the ones who are less damaged by an economic shut-down, and are the ones who contribute the most per capita to political campaigns.  Sacrificing the economic future of a generation is less important than the pacification and preservation of a donor base during a Presidential election year.
    0
  • Ditch-Runner
     both my sons have worked all thru the panic as both are deemed necessary one works in  maintenance   a large plastic bottle manufacture plant the other at a large hog farm 
    my wife is laid off and using the time to get some projects completed
        my nephew who is also in maintenance at a different company but has worked all thru it,  that company was suppose to start back up this week or next.  he told me  people do not want to go back  (as stated above ) getting a  600.00 and unemployment thru the end of June ?   making more money than when working  too easy to get use too

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity