{"id":35891,"date":"2024-03-07T13:49:28","date_gmt":"2024-03-07T19:49:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=35891"},"modified":"2024-03-07T16:13:22","modified_gmt":"2024-03-07T22:13:22","slug":"shortened-unemployment-eligibility-discussed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=35891","title":{"rendered":"Shortened unemployment eligibility discussed"},"content":{"rendered":"

Senators began first-round debate March 5 on a proposal that would reduce the maximum number of weeks a person could receive unemployment benefits in Nebraska under the Employment Security Act.<\/p>\n

\"Sen.
Sen. Merv Riepe<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

LB1170, introduced by Ralston Sen. Merv Riepe, would reduce the maximum amount of unemployment benefits a person is eligible for from 26 weeks to 16 weeks. The bill also would proportionally reduce the maximum benefit payable when a disqualification \u2014 such as voluntarily leaving work, misconduct or rejecting suitable employment \u2014 is assessed.<\/p>\n

The bill would maintain a current benefit clause that allows unemployment benefits to be extended in the case of an economic emergency. The provisions of LB1170 would take effect Jan. 1, 2025.<\/p>\n

Riepe said the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that there are 2.5 available jobs for every unemployed person in Nebraska. Unemployment benefits play a vital role in society, he said, but they also may inadvertently discourage individuals from actively seeking employment.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have to ask ourselves at what point does it stop becoming a safety net and \u2026 start becoming a disincentive for participating in society,\u201d Riepe said. \u201cWhile it\u2019s important to support Nebraskans in finding work that aligns with their experience and provides fair compensation, it\u2019s also critical to recognize that at a certain point individuals may need to accept available work opportunities.\u201d<\/p>\n

Proponents of the measure said the state\u2019s low unemployment rate and abundance of available jobs indicates that a reduction in unemployment benefits is necessary to sustain Nebraska\u2019s workforce.<\/p>\n

Seward Sen. Jana Hughes said offering displaced Nebraskans 26 weeks of unemployment benefits made sense during the pandemic and other times of economic upheaval, but is counterproductive when the state\u2019s current unemployment rate is 2.3%.<\/p>\n

\u201cLB1170 is a commonsense approach to dealing with reality,\u201d Hughes said. \u201cKeeping unemployment benefits at six months only serves to make our workforce issues unnecessarily worse.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte agreed, saying he can\u2019t walk two blocks without seeing a help wanted sign.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou shouldn\u2019t have to take six months to find a job,\u201d Jacobson said. \u201cYou shouldn\u2019t need six weeks to find a job, frankly.\u201d<\/p>\n

Speaking in opposition, Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh argued that forcing Nebraskans into jobs that aren\u2019t a good fit is not the best way to create a robust workforce. She offered a series of unsuccessful motions to extend debate on the proposal.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe jeopardize the ability of parents and families to get good jobs because they\u2019re going to have to take [any] job or have zero income whatsoever,\u201d Cavanaugh said.<\/p>\n

Lincoln Sen. George Dungan also opposed the measure. Children and families living in poverty should not be punished to prevent the potential misuse of the state\u2019s unemployment system, he said. Dungan also noted that only 18% of Nebraska unemployment claimants in 2022 continued to receive benefits beyond the proposed 16 weeks according to the state Department of Labor.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re not talking about people who abuse the system, we’re talking about hardworking Nebraskans,\u201d Dungan said. \u201cWhen you\u2019re struggling with the day-to-day realities of poverty, it is very, very difficult to pull yourself up by your own boot straps if you don\u2019t have the boot straps in the first place.\u201d<\/p>\n

Also speaking in opposition to LB1170, Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha said there is no evidence that a reduction in the maximum possible weeks of eligibility results in lower unemployment rates.<\/p>\n

After approximately four hours of debate, the Legislature adjourned for the day before voting on the bill\u2019s advancement. LB1170 remains on general file.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Senators began first-round debate March 5 on a proposal that seeks to lessen the number of weeks a person can receive unemployment benefits in Nebraska under the Employment Security Act.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":35890,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[7],"tags":[153],"class_list":["post-35891","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-business-and-labor","tag-sen-merv-riepe"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/LB1170RiepeArch3-4-24a.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35891","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=35891"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35891\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":35904,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35891\/revisions\/35904"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/35890"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=35891"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=35891"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=35891"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}