No federal employees have been ""furloughed"! (1 Viewer)

[Empirica]

According to Merriam-Webster these federal workers are not actually furloughed, but more like on paid leave with full benefits_

In fact; classifying them as "furloughed" makes them eligible for unemployment benefits in addition to their regular pay_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furlough - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1fur·lough
noun \ˈfər-(ˌ)lō\
: a period of time when an employee is told not to come to work and is not paid

 

[WorldWatcher]

According to Merriam-Webster these federal workers are not actually furloughed, but more like on paid leave with full benefits_

In fact; classifying them as "furloughed" makes them eligible for unemployment benefits in addition to their regular pay_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furlough - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1fur·lough
noun \ˈfər-(ˌ)lō\
: a period of time when an employee is told not to come to work and is not paid

Not true, they are not eligible to receive both unemployment and frulough pay. Currently (IIRC) the back pay has not been approved, the those EE are on furlough.

I believe though it's a pretty safe bet that the furloughed employees will receive back pay, which if they have drawn unemployment benefits from the state it will be considered an overpayment and the state can go back for the money. There are various methods that individual state will use. They file the overpayment and send you a bill. When you have outstanding money owed to the state they have a variety of avenues to encourage you to return the money such as bill collection or withholding services (for example not renewing a drivers license, keeping tax refunds that are due), or having pay docked.

Most states pretty much function the same way.

************************

"If federal employees are later paid for time not worked, the payment will be considered back pay and it will result in an overpayment of any unemployment compensation benefits paid," ADOL said in the announcement.

Furloughed federal workers impacted by government shutdown can now file for unemployment online | al.com


************************

NOTE: If Federal employees are later paid for time not worked, the payment will be considered back pay and it will result in an overpayment of any unemployment insurance benefits paid.

Federal Shutdown 2013 - Unemployment Insurance Procedures - Unemployment Insurance Claimants

************************

NOTE: If Congress decides employees who were previously placed on non pay status shall be paid for the time not worked, any benefits paid will be an overpayment and you may be required to repay any overpaid unemployment benefits during the period of your furlough.

Federal Shutdown ? Unemployment Benefits for Furloughed Workers | Unemployment Insurance


>>>>

 

[TheNextEra]

According to Merriam-Webster these federal workers are not actually furloughed, but more like on paid leave with full benefits_

In fact; classifying them as "furloughed" makes them eligible for unemployment benefits in addition to their regular pay_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furlough - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1fur·lough
noun \ˈfər-(ˌ)lō\
: a period of time when an employee is told not to come to work and is not paid

And your source that they are on paid leave is?

 

[Mr. Invisible]

According to Merriam-Webster these federal workers are not actually furloughed, but more like on paid leave with full benefits_

In fact; classifying them as "furloughed" makes them eligible for unemployment benefits in addition to their regular pay_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furlough - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1fur·lough
noun \ˈfər-(ˌ)lō\
: a period of time when an employee is told not to come to work and is not paid

You do realize that you have to be out of work for a considerable amount of time to get unemployment? And that in order to get unemployment benefits, you have to be actively looking for a job, which they check on, correct?

 

[WorldWatcher]

You do realize that you have to be out of work for a considerable amount of time to get unemployment? And that in order to get unemployment benefits, you have to be actively looking for a job, which they check on, correct?

The qualification period varies by state (I assume), but in Virginia the qualification period is the first week of non-pay.


Your Unemployment Benefit Rights and Responsibilities | Virginia Employment Commission


>>>>

 

[Risky Thicket]

Well somebody needs to tell two friends of mine who work for the National Forest Service. They have been told not to come to work and that they would not be receiving pay for the days they are furloughed. They do still have medical benefits.

 

[Empirica]

You do realize that you have to be out of work for a considerable amount of time to get unemployment? And that in order to get unemployment benefits, you have to be actively looking for a job, which they check on, correct?

I have no experience with "unemployment" policies and procedures but thousands are reportedly already signing up_

Unemployment Insurance? For the Furloughed, It Might Just Be a Loan - Businessweek
"Already thousands of employees have applied for coverage. In Virginia, for example, 959 federal workers submitted claims on the first five business days of the shutdown, according to Fogg. That figure doesn’t include contractors who have been furloughed. All told, she said, the state saw 3,500 more claims last week than the average for the five prior weeks. In Maryland, meanwhile, more than 16,000 furloughed workers have filed claims, according to the Baltimore Sun—four times the typical rate."

 

[WhyNotWhyNot]

You do realize that you have to be out of work for a considerable amount of time to get unemployment? And that in order to get unemployment benefits, you have to be actively looking for a job, which they check on, correct?

Not quite. There is more than one classification of lay-off (at least in Colorado). There is permanent laid-off and "job attached" lay-off. In the first case the employer's paperwork tells the state that they have no intent of refilling the position and you are discharged. In that case the state expects you to prove that you are looking for work while you receive unemployment benefits. In the case of "job attached" lay-off (or furlough), the employer tells that state that temporarily there is insufficient work to maintain active employment but that the employer is committed to rehiring the employee when the temporary condition expires. In that event the state does not require you to look for work.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have no experience with "unemployment" policies and procedures but thousands are reportedly already signing up_

Unemployment Insurance? For the Furloughed, It Might Just Be a Loan - Businessweek
"Already thousands of employees have applied for coverage. In Virginia, for example, 959 federal workers submitted claims on the first five business days of the shutdown, according to Fogg. That figure doesn’t include contractors who have been furloughed. All told, she said, the state saw 3,500 more claims last week than the average for the five prior weeks. In Maryland, meanwhile, more than 16,000 furloughed workers have filed claims, according to the Baltimore Sun—four times the typical rate."

Of course they can sign up. They are currently on furlough. The back pay legislation has not passed through the Congress yet. It has passed the House, (IIRC) Obama has indicated support, but it has not been taken up by the Senate. Therefore the employees are in a non-pay status and eligible for unemployment. Future changes could change that, but that is the way it is as of today.

If the legislation passes in the future, then the situation will be different.

If the legislation is approved, then they will not be eligible for unemployment and if they have received any they will owe it back to the State as an "overpayment".



>>>>

 

[Empirica]

Not true, they are not eligible to receive both unemployment and frulough pay. Currently (IIRC) the back pay has not been approved, the those EE are on furlough.

I believe though it's a pretty safe bet that the furloughed employees will receive back pay, which if they have drawn unemployment benefits from the state it will be considered an overpayment and the state can go back for the money. There are various methods that individual state will use. They file the overpayment and send you a bill. When you have outstanding money owed to the state they have a variety of avenues to encourage you to return the money such as bill collection or withholding services (for example not renewing a drivers license, keeping tax refunds that are due), or having pay docked.

Most states pretty much function the same way.

************************

"If federal employees are later paid for time not worked, the payment will be considered back pay and it will result in an overpayment of any unemployment compensation benefits paid," ADOL said in the announcement.

Furloughed federal workers impacted by government shutdown can now file for unemployment online | al.com


************************

NOTE: If Federal employees are later paid for time not worked, the payment will be considered back pay and it will result in an overpayment of any unemployment insurance benefits paid.

Federal Shutdown 2013 - Unemployment Insurance Procedures - Unemployment Insurance Claimants

************************

NOTE: If Congress decides employees who were previously placed on non pay status shall be paid for the time not worked, any benefits paid will be an overpayment and you may be required to repay any overpaid unemployment benefits during the period of your furlough.

Federal Shutdown ? Unemployment Benefits for Furloughed Workers | Unemployment Insurance

>>>>

These are spoiled pampered federal employees who operate on a totally separate set of standards than does the private sector_

IMO; your assumption that the powers that be would require them to pay back unemployment benefits is a giant leap of faith_

Although I certainly do hope your faith in the system is well deserved and my low opinion of it is somehow unfounded_

 

[davidtaylorjr]

According to Merriam-Webster these federal workers are not actually furloughed, but more like on paid leave with full benefits_

In fact; classifying them as "furloughed" makes them eligible for unemployment benefits in addition to their regular pay_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furlough - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1fur·lough
noun \ˈfər-(ˌ)lō\
: a period of time when an employee is told not to come to work and is not paid

Actually they have been furloughed. My dad is a Federal Agent and he is NOT getting paid. They told them to file for unemployment.

 

[WorldWatcher]

These are spoiled pampered federal employees who operate on a totally separate set of standards than does the private sector_

What separate set of standards are these federal employees receiving under State unemployment laws?

Private Sector = Laid off or furloughed with no pay, eligible for unemployment.

Federal Employees = Furloughed with no pay, eligible for unemployment.

Private Sector = If in a pay status, not eligible for unemployment.

Federal Employees = If in a pay status, not eligible for unemployment.

Private Sector = If receiving unemployment while in a pay status it is consisered an overpayment and the money is owed back.

Federal Employees = If receiving unemployment while in a pay status it is consisered an overpayment and the money is owed back.​

These are spoiled pampered federal employees who operate on a totally separate set of standards than does the private sector_

IMO; your assumption that the powers that be would require them to pay back unemployment benefits is a giant leap of faith_

Although I certainly do hope your faith in the system is well deserved and my low opinion of it is somehow unfounded_

It's not "faith".

I can't speak for how it works in every State but I work in Human Resources for an organization in Virginia. When an Ex-EE applies (or a laid off employee) applies to the Virginia Employment Commission for unemployment a claim record is opened. The VEC then has a Case Officer contract the last employer for each and every claim to determine the circumstances surrounding why the EE is out of work. If the EE resigned or was let go for cause, then they are not eligible for unemployment. If they were RIF'd or their position was eliminated, then they are.

We are also required and must provide to the Claim's Officer documentation as required to support our position. In the case of the furlough each employee received (and the government has a copy) of their furlough notification and the Claim's Officer can request that either from the EE or the Employer and this I know as we routinely get documentation requests from the VEC.

Employers are charge for their Unemployment Insurance coverage based on their claims history and payouts, the higher your claims the higher your rates so employers ensure that only those actually eligible for unemployment qualify. Failure to do so results in increased costs to the business during the next higher cycle because of increased valid claims. When (and if) the furlough pay passes you can bet those organizations will be ensuring that furloughed employees that claim unemployment have those claims dismissed so the state can recover the charges.


>>>>

 

[Thom Paine]

Of course they can sign up. They are currently on furlough. The back pay legislation has not passed through the Congress yet. It has passed the House, (IIRC) Obama has indicated support, but it has not been taken up by the Senate. Therefore the employees are in a non-pay status and eligible for unemployment. Future changes could change that, but that is the way it is as of today.

If the legislation passes in the future, then the situation will be different.

If the legislation is approved, then they will not be eligible for unemployment and if they have received any they will owe it back to the State as an "overpayment".>>>>

I find it curious that anyone would receive back pay for not working :thinking:screwy

Thom Paine

 

[WorldWatcher]

I find it curious that anyone would receive back pay for not working :thinking:screwy

Thom Paine

That's a whole different question.

IMHO if you are not working, then you should not be paid. The problem is neither side wants to stand by that (as showed by the back pay bill passing unanimously in the House) because it hurts and people will really be angry. Well if people were to get really angry then maybe the ****heads on Congress (on both sides of the isle) would actually feel pressured to sit down and hammer out a deal.

But no, they want a "shutdown" that doesn't hurt.



>>>>

 

[roguenuke]

I find it curious that anyone would receive back pay for not working :thinking:screwy

Thom Paine

Some of them were told to come back to work but they don't know if they are going to get paid for coming back to work, like the civilian in my husband's office. He is working but doesn't know if he will get paid for this time yet or not.

 

[Thom Paine]

Some of them were told to come back to work but they don't know if they are going to get paid for coming back to work, like the civilian in my husband's office. He is working but doesn't know if he will get paid for this time yet or not.

Interesting and more curious ... I have never been able to require someone to work and not pay that person ( even salaried personnel ).... Federal and State labor laws..... hmmmm

Thanks for that view

Good ev'nin Rogue

Thom Paine

 

[ashurbanipal]

I find it curious that anyone would receive back pay for not working

Depends on the situation. In this case, the employer seems to be saying to the workers that they are not to come in to work, and that they will receive pay as if they had. Since the employer is the one telling the employee what to do, if the employee complies, they ought to be paid.

 

[Thom Paine]

Depends on the situation. In this case, the employer seems to be saying to the workers that they are not to come in to work, and that they will receive pay as if they had. Since the employer is the one telling the employee what to do, if the employee complies, they ought to be paid.

I accept your response as sincere... If anything near that is the case it is only Gov. employment.... It is no such application in civilian industry.

Curiosity deepens

Thom Paine

 

[ashurbanipal]

I accept your response as sincere... If anything near that is the case it is only Gov. employment.... It is no such application in civilian industry.

Well, I've seen it a few times in my experience both as an employee and an employer. It is pretty rare, but it happens when the employer experiences a situation in which they literally cannot operate for a short period, but also don't want to lose their experienced employees. For example: at one of the companies for which I worked, we once had a catastrophic storm which came and knocked out not only our servers but also power to most of the city. I was head of purchasing at the time, which function we had just recently brought back in house (long story). We had no choice but to send people home. But I paid them for the day because I was aware that without those employees, the company would tank. I didn't want to give them any reason to even think about looking for another job at that point.

However, I'm not sure this is anything more than a description of what is. It doesn't seem to have much to do with what should be.

 

[Thom Paine]

Well, I've seen it a few times in my experience both as an employee and an employer. It is pretty rare, but it happens when the employer experiences a situation in which they literally cannot operate for a short period, but also don't want to lose their experienced employees. For example: at one of the companies for which I worked, we once had a catastrophic storm which came and knocked out not only our servers but also power to most of the city. I was head of purchasing at the time, which function we had just recently brought back in house (long story). We had no choice but to send people home. But I paid them for the day because I was aware that without those employees, the company would tank. I didn't want to give them any reason to even think about looking for another job at that point.

However, I'm not sure this is anything more than a description of what is. It doesn't seem to have much to do with what should be.

Thanks for the response. I can understand your specific example. I have given extra 'paid vacation' in a similar manner.
I have a difficult time with paying people for not working and/or requiring someone to work with the possibility of no remuneration for same. In the latter instance is the Fed Gov. breaking laws?

Looking at our political situation as a poor TV sitcom rather than a Greek Tragedy keeps me from becoming 'junkyard dog angry.'

To keep things in perspective, also for a short time I had similar fascination with the theatrics of David Copperfield ( magician ). :roll:
Enough prattle for now.

Good evening sir

Thom Paine