Log in to WRAL.com with one click using your favorite social network:
OR
Log in using your WRAL.com account:



Wrong email/password combination.

Forgot password?

Register with WRAL.com using your favorite social network:
OR
Register for a WRAL.com account using our web form.

1:44 a.m. • 5-24-13

Weather Forecast for Raleigh

  • Today: Partly Cloudy.
    • Hi: 74° F
  • Sat: Clear.
    • Hi: 72° F
  • Sun: Partly Cloudy.
    • Hi: 75° F

Other Locations

> 7 Day Forecast

Doppler Image
@NCCapitol
House votes on unemployment
print friendly

House passes unemployment insurance rewrite

Published: 2013-02-05 16:21:00
Updated: 2013-02-05 17:31:18

The state House on Tuesday passed a sweeping rewrite of North Carolina's unemployment insurance law, voting 77-42 to cut the value and duration of weekly benefits.

As with an earlier debate on the bill Monday, Republican sponsors of the legislation turned back Democratic amendments to make the bill more generous toward unemployed workers in some circumstances. The measure now goes to the state Senate.

Rep. Jean Farmer-Butterfield, D-Wilson, said she mistakenly voted yes on the bill on Monday night.

"Now I want to tell you why, why it is important that I vote 'no' today," Farmer-Butterfield said. "This is not a balanced approach....People affected by this bill are unemployed through no fault of their own."

Farmer-Butterfield and her fellow Democrats said the bill asked unemployed workers to give up hundreds of millions of dollars worth of benefits while asking only $20-plus million in concessions from businesses, who pay state unemployment taxes. Businesses argue they are being hit hard by federal unemployment taxes as well. 

"It isn't that out of balance," said Rep. John Blust, R-Guilford, arguing the worker-versus-business assertion was a false dichotomy. It was the businesses, he said, that paid for the benefits the workers were using. 

Blust and other Republicans said the state can no longer afford benefits as generous as the $535 per week currently offered. The new maximum benefit would be $350 per week under the bill. 

"The benefits we currently pay with the situation we have are not sustainable," said Rep. William Brawley, R-Mecklenburg.

North Carolina owes the federal government more than $2.5 billion that was borrowed to pay state-funded unemployment claims. The bill reduces the maximum weekly benefits and raises state unemployment insurance taxes in order to repay that debt more quickly.

Rep. Rick Glazier, D-Cumberland, offered an amendment to allow more workers to claim unemployment. The current bill cuts down on the "good cause" reasons that justify claiming unemployment. Glazier's amendment would have added back family hardships as a good cause.

For example, Glazier said, workers who had to leave their jobs to care for a sick child or other family member would be eligible for benefits. Under the current bill, those who have to leave a job because they cannot work a particular shift due to a sick family member would not be eligible.

Glazier argued that his amendment would have little financial impact because only one-tenth-of-one-percent of those who file for unemployment use such family hardship reasons. 

But Republicans said the bill was carefully crafted during the fall and winter and should not be changed. 

"I reluctantly stand again to ask you to vote no on this amendment because we need to keep this bill in tact and let it go into effect and then surely we can go back and look at all the consequences," said Rep. Julia Howard, R-Davie, the bill's primary sponsor. 

Both the Glazier amendment and another that would have raised the duration of benefits for workers who lost work as part of a mass plant closing failed along largely party-line votes. 

Republicans argued that the bill would free businesses from paying taxes to repay the federal debt more quickly. That, in turn, would spark job creation.

"When do you expect to see the jobs from this bill materialize?" Rep. Yvonne Holley, D-Wake, asked Brawley.

The Mecklenburg Republican replied, "I can't trace you the specific jobs but I can tell you that the macroeconomics scales well...I do know that businesses that are losing money lay people off."

The Senate Finance Committee has scheduled a hearing on a companion unemployment bill for Wednesday.

Gov. Pat McCrory backs the legislation, saying it would put North Carolina on par with neighboring states and help people find jobs.

"We've been implementing the current system for a long time, and North Carolina remains the fifth-highest unemployment rate in the country," McCrory said. "So, I'm not going to continue to implement strategies that don't work. We're going to try new strategies to get people to work. That's our goal."

Read More Posts from this Blog

168 Comments


WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.


page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first

"Charity or entitlements? What does churches and charity of unemployment have in common? Why all of a sudden is the left mixing religion and politics? And we need to see this type of financial management in more areas of the government. Hard decisions aren't easy OR popular sometimes. Which explains why the Libs didn't do it."

Unemployment is something you earn by working, its not welfare or charity. and the only reason there was any debt was that companies did not pay what they needed to before and after the recession.

This is just a money grab by big business with the added bonus that it makes employees easier to exploit.

Still lets hope lots of those laid off off over the next few years voted GOP.....they will reap what they sowed.

NC has a church on every corner, but there is no charity In their hearts only GREED. peace2u

=================================================

Charity or entitlements? What does churches and charity of unemployment have in common? Why all of a sudden is the left mixing religion and politics? And we need to see this type of financial management in more areas of the government. Hard decisions aren't easy OR popular sometimes. Which explains why the Libs didn't do it.

Folks, just imagine if Romney had won!!! We would be seeing this type of thing everywhere from the greedy GOP!!! NC has a church on every corner, but there is no charity In their hearts of the GOP, only GREED.

"So many clueless in this thread. Unemployment INSURANCE is paid for, not a government handout. The business folk, back in the 90's when things looked pretty rosy convinced the powers that be to cut the rates on that insurance, and put it in their pockets instead. Now, things aren't so rosy, and the insurance fund is in the hole. Had it been properly funded all along, this wouldn't be necessary."

Thanks, Bohica2, for your attempts to educate people! About 1 in 20 posters actually know what they're talking about.

Why is everyone so concerned with things Obama is not concerned about??? lessismore

=====================================================

Well, he's not concerned about anymore re elections, is he? Hmmmmm, could be a great reason. We knew that would happen. I'm now waiting for the pact with Putin and Russia that he was caught gaffing on a hot mic back in the fall. He said just let me get through this election and we can deal. Same as current hot issues. It will become a top issue in about 2 1/2 years when presidential candidates are being talked about. Ole BO will fire up the empty promise machine again and lay the path for Hillary. They're already best buds................Joe has to be steaming at this point!!!!

I actually heard a man say, "I found a job, but it pays less than unemployment benefits, do I have to take it, will I lose my unemployment benefits if I don't". lessismore

==============================================

On the short time I received benefits, I was told no, I didn't have to accept a job that paid a lot less that what I was receiving at the time. I asked what was a lot, and was told it was judged on an individual bases. Former income, current benefit was taken into account to determine. Sounded sketchy to me, but ended up netting less with a job I took than if I would have stayed on UE. I was happy to take it, and 2 1/2 years later, I'm ahead of where I was in my career and income than when I got laid off in 2008. It wasn't fun, but we got through it. I did have a wife that was working which helped, but 2 kids in high school, a mortgage, credit cards, and 2 car payments made it tough.

If they didn't have to pay $X a month for unemployment insurance they could be putting that X dollars in your check. Therefore it's coming out of your check indirectly. Same is true for all benefits employer funded. junkmail5

========================================

While I agree with that totally, I read the statement as there was no line item deduction on an individual paycheck for UE benefits. AND your statement about an employer should be able to offer healthcare OR the equivalent of the money he would pay for it back to you is spot on.

Where are the jobs for all those people who now can not even collect unemployment when they get laid off? I guess it will just be more people to apply for food stamps, Medicaid, and public assistance. More money will be spent by the state to help children and adults in need.

Obama said we are in a recovery, plenty of jobs. He doesn't talk about the economy or jobs any more. Why is everyone concerned with unemployment benefits???? Just listen to Obama....his only concerns now is immigration, gays, religion, and guns. Why is everyone so concerned with things Obama is not concerned about???

Accounting 101, if you don't have it to spend.. don't spend it! Sorry folks but the free ride has to end. This is an incentive to actually get out and look for a job!

Life-goes-on. February 6, 2013 9:27 a.m. _______________________ Ah, if it was just that simple. What this law does, it stop citizens of NC from getting some of the Federal money that is paid out by NC businesses. It pays back money owed, quicker, which is good, but it fails to support those who lose their jobs, rewards businesses and fails to ensure that the UE funds are solvent for the future.

I actually heard a man say, "I found a job, but it pays less than unemployment benefits, do I have to take it, will I lose my unemployment benefits if I don't".

Get a job and you don't have to worry about stuff like this.

Good. Now get it to the Senate so they can pass it.

This doesn't work at all. You can make the same argument about how much sick leave, vacation, health insurance, 401k matches, and pretty much ANY work benefit offered by an employer. Singlemalt

Yes, you can.

Which is why it works _exactly_

Every dollar your employer spends on something related to the worker, that isn't salary, COULD be salary if they didn't get that other benefit.

that's the entire point.

Some employers offer a choice even. You can have healthcare, or you can have the dollars he would otherwise has spent on healthcare (nice to take this if you get healthcare via your spouses job for example).

If they didn't have to pay $X a month for unemployment insurance they could be putting that X dollars in your check. Therefore it's coming out of your check indirectly.

Same is true for all benefits employer funded.

Accounting 101, if you don't have it to spend.. don't spend it! Sorry folks but the free ride has to end. This is an incentive to actually get out and look for a job!

North Carolina owes the federal government more than $2.5 billion that was borrowed to pay state-funded unemployment claims.

I'm just curious as to how much of that money lined the pockets of our politicians?

Junkmail5; that's a matter of some debate.

there's a pretty good argument that since the employer has to pay X dollars in unemployment insurance for a given employee, that is X dollars _less_ he is offering in salary for that employee.

This doesn't work at all. You can make the same argument about how much sick leave, vacation, health insurance, 401k matches, and pretty much ANY work benefit offered by an employer.

Where is there an incentive for people on welfare to work. Welfare benefits are for life.- superman

Uh... what?

First, there's only about 4.4 million total people on welfare.

For another, they're not "for life"

there's a maximum of 5 years of benefits, lifetime.

And you're required by law to have obtained a job within 24 months of going on those benefits.

YOU, the person, DO NOT PAY UNEMPLOYMENT! Singlemal

that's a matter of some debate.

there's a pretty good argument that since the employer has to pay X dollars in unemployment insurance for a given employee, that is X dollars _less_ he is offering in salary for that employee.

In which case the employee is really the one paying it, albeit indirectly.

"The problem is way too many people abused the system. Changes had to be made. Don't blame the lawmakers, blame the deadbeats out there." andyx3x

if that were true (and you offer no evidence it is) then the CORRECT fix would be reform that prevents or detects such abuse.

Not an across the board 33% cut in max benefits and a cut in length of them. That hurts -everybody- and doesn't actually address the claimed abuse at all.

You can partially blame the "leeches" who kept applying for extension after extension. There are probably many of the so-called "99ers" who will claim there just weren't any jobs or that they were "over-qualified". Use what ever excuse you want but the truth is unemployment insurance was always temporary, not a way of life. The state gets partial blame too for not collecting U/E taxes from all companies. There were even companies who made a profit while not having to pay this tax. I think the maximum number of weeks needed to be cut, but NOT the benefits. I think if someone loses a decent job and can't readily find one, they won't be able to make it on these new rates (in the interim).

@ Nancy: ((shudder))

Where is there an incentive for people on welfare to work. Welfare benefits are for life. Instead of working with unemployment benefits they should be working to lower welfare benefits to get those people to work.

to andyx3x.. guess you have never been unemployed

I was unemployed for over a year. I had no idea I would find myself unemployed at 40. My husband and I were careful savers and we lived beneath our means. We cut back significantly, but there's only so much belt you can tighten. I applied for almost 1,000 jobs before I was hired as a temporary worker. And I was grateful to get that job.

================================================

@happymom - My same story, family and all. Hopefully the system worked for you and kept you out of foreclosure and a brighter future in store. A testament to the way we should be and not feeling the entitlement of someone else taking care of us. My journey took 2 1/2 years to get back on track, hopefully yours won't take that long.

Take a few minutes to read real questions posed on the NC site about unemployment benefits and you'll understand the mindset that took over benefits and why the fraud rate is high.

Scroll down to the lower part of the page and just understand you're reading real comments from real people in NC looking to get benefits ....

http://unemploymenthandbook.com/state-unemployment-directory/north-carolina-unemployment

Labor unions are cringing on their seats at the notion that UE benefits are going to get cut. Why? If more people are made available for the labor force, it's simply a supply and demand factor. More labor to fill the same or less spots means cheaper labor rates for employers. It's been like that for years. It's a great time to be an employer and have the reduced labor rates and salaries (about the only advantage for small to medium business owners). These are bad times for all, but there has to be a turn in habits to create REAL change, not shallow, empty promise change.

It's not a free lunch, you pay unemployment. Welfare is a free lunch. The unemployment rate is so high because there is no jobs and what few their are undocumented workers.

maggiesp7

i think i get what yoiu are trying to say here. sorry to preak your heart but that is simply not true.

I have worked for 2 different companies over the past 2 years and both have struggled to get and retain employees. the last company i was with had a 75% rejection rate due to drug use! 75%!about 50% where I am now.

Got friends all over the state with similar stories, plenty of jobs open just no one to take them. or better yet, someone will take the job work a few weeks then quit showing up.

right back on unemployment.

people need to get it in gear. i know too many people who have found good work in a very short amount of time by just getting up and doing something, not sitting at home on their backside waitin for the check.

@maggie . their are undocumented workers vs. there are... and so has millions vs so have millions. There is no jobs vs are no jobs.

If a person makes $250 a week drawing unemployment, but gets a job offer making $350 a week, where is the incentive to get a job? Then they get extension after extension after extension. What are most people going to do? They are going to sit on their rear and just draw unemployment as long as they can.

I know a person who drew unemployment for years with all the extensions. Then when the benefits finally ran out, he got a job within a week. He only got a job when he absolutely had to.

You have to give many people an incentive to go get a job. If they are making close to what they would get working just on unemployment, what do you expect?

And people aren't going to take one of the many part time jobs that are offered out there. Why? Because the money they make there is deducted from their unemployment check each week. Why do that when you can just sit at home and earn the same money?

The system was broke and had to be fixed. It's just that simple.

Good Move, when you subsidize something, you get more of it.

We pay unemployment. Well what did you do with all the money? ......maggiesp7

=========================================

If you are an employer you pay but as an individual you don't pay a cent for UE insurance or benefits. And what happened to the money? It was borrowed from the Fed to pay benefits to the unemployed, now the state is repaying. Just because you didn't collect any, doesn't mean they are holding your share for the future. More than likely, someone abusing the benefits got yours. Happy now?

You know, I was speaking to a young man yesterday and he is wanting to change jobs. He said he would never risk his current job without another one now with this new unemployment law getting ready to take affect. Then he laughed and said, "see this new law is working already". And he is correct. People will think twice before going on unemployment now with this new rate and length of time you can draw benefits, so it is already working.

this is a good move on behalf of the state and the people that take pride in the state and themselves. Yes, I know some will still feel it is unfair and some will struggle, but it is necessary to heal the wounds of 'reckless spending' by the state for so many previous years.

I just got off unemployment and here is my thing: It was easy - too easy. I felt guilty "taking from the system" but making $525 a week for not doing a thing other than taking 5 minutes a week to file online that I looked for jobs. It made me embarrassed. In all honesty, I believe there needs o be some level of community service put back into the system if you are on unemployment OR have an option to continue your education. There needs to be a subsidy system in place to re-educate folks. The same goes for any other welfare programs. Too many people have their hands out these days.

Finally on the right track !

Let's face it, the spending has to stop and nobody thinks it is enjoyable to do this, but tough decisions are going to have to be made. 20 some weeks is a huge benefit. If the focus were on job creation, we wouldn't be blogging about free loaders on unemployment for 60+ weeks and longer. I was unemployed for a period of time in 2008 and 2009, but I found work and eventually got back into my field of expertise and back on my feet. Without motivation, there are some who will ride the program til it's broke, NOT all, but there are some. They need to get back in the game and contribute rather than drain the resources. And YES, I received the max benefit of $500, AND took a job for less net pay to get started again. Face it, Unemployment Benefits are NOT entitled to anyone, nor should they be. Receivers should be grateful for anything they receive. I'd worry about SS being available when retirement hits more so than a cut in UE benefits.

You are incorrect, that wasn't insane, it was the correct and right thing to do. But of course the gop and McCrory don't have hte kahunas to actually do something that makes common sense and helps people. Good riddance to them, hopefully the gop will finally become obsolete.

How is it common sense if we cant afford it? You are seriously telling me that people need 90+ weeks of unemployment? Thats insane. If you cant find a job in 60 weeks you have a problem. Im not saying its ideal but you can find a job. Our ancestors that lived through the great depression would be shaking their heads at the weakness and whininess that many Americans display today. Roll up your sleeves, quit making excuses, and make the hard decisions and dso what has to be done. No one guaranteed a great quality of life for everyone. You get life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness not the guarantee of it

I was temporarily unemployed for 2 months last year and I'm here to tell you that trying to keep the rent, power, car insurance, and grocery bills paid on $452 a week was no easy task.. Yes thats right $452 a week because I was getting the maximum allowance BUT they DO tax that, federal mandatory and state optional, so in the end it came out to $452 a week. With that said I probably wouldn't have been able to keep my head above water if I'd only been getting the $350 that they want to reduce it to BEFORE TAXES!! As it was I had to rob Peter to pay Paul until I could find another job. Now with that said I do however aggree with the need to limit HOW LONG these benifits are good for. 2 yrs unemployed is WAY too long to go without finding a job!!! I can understand 4 to 6 months but really? Are they even trying??

The new bill makes good sense. The deadbeats need to get off the couch and take care of themselves! Maybe now you'll WANT to go to work.

At least McCrory's cabinet was able to get raises even before they started...that is a great job!!!

McCrory's cabinet costs less than Bev Perdue's since there are 2 perople on it making 1 dollar a year. Perdue put us in this mess by borrowing 2+ billion from Obama and extending UE to 90+ weeks. 90+ weeks is ridiculous and because of that terrible decision by a loving liberal now UE has to be overhauled to find a way to pay that money back.

Want to increase employment? Stop paying out unemployment. People will go back to work.

Unemployment Fraud is at an unprecedented level.

I just hope the people that made or passed the law, have to survive on $350.00 dollars a week at one time during thier life~~~, I suspect they will never have to use the system, how many politicians do you hear about on unemployeement, for me never! is it not strange that the same people that make the laws, never seem to have to use them themselves?? Once again, the repair is put on the back of the middle class, because our goverment can not do the job they were hired to do,, protect the majority,, not themselves !! from a person who once had to use the system to survive.. "first time ever" and in this crazy job world--- it could be you next!

YOU, the person, DO NOT PAY UNEMPLOYMENT!

It's not a free lunch, you pay unemployment. Welfare is a free lunch. The unemployment rate is so high because there is no jobs and what few their are undocumented workers.

We pay unemployment, and when some people need to draw the benefits they start cutting them out. Well what did you do with all the money? I have worked all my life and never drew unemployment and so has millions of others. So I ask again where's all the money?

Definitely worth a REPOST!: "The problem is way too many people abused the system. Changes had to be made. Don't blame the lawmakers, blame the deadbeats out there." andyx3x

For the unemployed who voted republican....serves you right.

It's great to live in a caring and supportive society. Willing to help those that need help. Unfortunately, this isn't it.

I can't wait to see how many folks now are suddenly able to go out and take a job instead of living off the public dole!! This is a great piece of legislation.

Well, if you voted for these republicans clowns then you don't have anyone to blame but yourself. This is just the start of their cuts...get ready! If $350 is the max you can get now then most of the rest you who weren't getting the max to start with will be getting less than $350. At least McCrory's cabinet was able to get raises even before they started...that is a great job!!!

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first

Political Video Picks

 
  • Both the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans, but House Republicans do not agree with all of the proposals put forward by…

  • President Barack Obama addresses the United States drone program and Guantanamo Bay prison in a national security speech from the…

  • President Barack Obama on Thursday defended America's controversial drone attacks as legal, effective and a necessary linchpin in an…

  • The N.C. Senate holds its final vote on its $20.6 billion state budget proposal for 2013-14.

  • Gov. Pat McCrory and Raleigh Mayor Nancy McFarlane on Thursday asked the General Assembly to give the city and state about 10 months…

  • Gov. Pat McCrory and Raleigh Mayor Nancy McFarlane discuss the efforts of the North Carolina General Assembly to rewrite legislation…