CHARLESTON, W.Va. - During interim legislative meetings this week, state lawmakers will look at voluntary work-sharing. Instead of laying off employees when they need to cut costs, employers could collaborate with the unemployment-insurance system to keep people working at reduced hours.

Sean O'Leary, a policy analyst with the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, says that right now, a worker loses his job and collects unemployment. But he says under work-sharing, companies could cut back hours instead of workers, with unemployment making up part of the lost pay.

"They've got ten workers, they can lay off two. Or they can have all their employees work four days a week, and they'd collect unemployment benefits on the fifth day."

A draft bill was put on the agenda for a committee meeting today.

O'Leary says some lawmakers have asked if work-sharing adds a new burden, for employers or the unemployment system, but the program is voluntary and only kicks in if an employer asks for it. He adds the states that now use work-sharing say it costs the same, because it's just using the same money in a different way.

"If you're paying a tenth of a benefit to ten employees or a full benefit to one employee, it's the same amount that's being paid out. So then, the same amount's being charged back to the employer."

By making the system more flexible, O'Leary says, work-sharing has been proven to help employers and the economy as a whole.

"It allows employers to keep their work force intact. It allows them to keep employees that they value: they don't risk losing them. They're ready to ramp production right back up once the economy's going. And that allows for shorter recessions and quicker recoveries."

He says it's also good for workers, because they don't lose their skills, work habits or motivation after long stretches of unemployment.

"They're typically on work-sharing for a shorter amount of time than they are on unemployment benefits. They don't lose their job; they don't become detached from the work force."

About half the states have voluntary work-sharing programs now.

More information is at goo.gl/eHZxm.

Joint House/Senate Committee meets at 10 a.m. Mon. in the House Judiciary Committee Room (410-m) at State Capitol Bldg., 1900 Kanawha Blvd. E., Charleston.




get more stories like this via email

Workers at a hospital on the Oregon coast are citing a victory in contract negotiations with their employer.

More than 100 members of SEIU Local 49 at Samaritan North Lincoln Hospital in Lincoln City will receive raises averaging 10% over the first year of their new contract. Brittany King, a CT special imaging technologist at the hospital, said many workers have been struggling to afford living in the community, and this raise makes the hospital's wages competitive with the local job market.

"There are a lot of members," she said, "that told me specifically that, 'I think this is a wage that I can live with, that means I don't have to leave Samaritan.'"

King said workers have dealt with a number of tragedies in recent years, including the pandemic and 2020 wildfires. Their new contract also expands education funding.

Rachel Eggleton, a certified nursing assistant at the hospital, said workers rallied over Memorial Day weekend when contract negotiations stalled and the community members showed their support.

"Once they saw us out in the rain rallying," she said, "they realized, 'OK, maybe there's something wrong. Maybe we need to help out our health-care workers, because they've been there through thick and thin for the entire pandemic, regardless of whatever's happening.' We still provided the care that they needed."

Eggleton said this support has been key.

"Getting everybody involved and getting the community involved," she said, "it will always bring us better things."

A new Minnesota law, which goes into effect Sunday, removes requirements restricting Social Security recipients from receiving full jobless benefits as well.

Bill sponsors noted Minnesota was the last state to have the offset requirement. It reduced by 50% unemployment aid for laid-off workers who, within the first year, either received or started to apply for Social Security.

Kate Schaefers, volunteer state president of AARP Minnesota, said it had a profound effect on older workers as the pandemic began to take shape. She pointed to testimony from a Rochester man who had worked part-time in retail and lost his job but had no unemployment benefits to supplement his income.

"He told us that he cut back on expenses, including his medication, because he couldn't afford them living just off of his Social Security check," Schaefers recounted.

Schaefers pointed out they are disappointed the changes are not retroactive, leaving out many residents devastated by the crisis. But she noted supporters secured a compromise with the Senate by starting the repeal date this year, as opposed to waiting longer to appease concerns about the unemployment fund's balance.

Schaefers said looking ahead, the repeal will be beneficial to the growing number of older adults who cannot afford to solely rely on their pension in the face of rising consumer costs.

"This is a key part of their retirement ... continued work," Schaefers explained. "This is going to benefit them if they get laid off; that they can access those unemployment benefits."

The group estimated 16% of Minnesotans 62 and older receiving Social Security are still in the labor force. It added the benefits are modest, averaging nearly $1,600 a month in Minnesota.

The so-called "great resignation" isn't playing out for all workers. A new survey covering North Dakota and Minnesota shows people on the lower end of the income scale face obstacles in jumping to other job opportunities.

The Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, along with Community Action agencies in both states, heard from more than 200 individuals, mainly working in social services, education and health care. Most expressed a desire to move up the career ladder, but said they lack the resources to learn new skills, or that expenses such as child care get in the way.

Erick Garcia Luna, regional outreach director at the Minneapolis Fed, said it becomes more pronounced for people earning very little in their current job.

"If a family is making minimum wage," he said, "they're going to have a harder time taking the time, for example, to get trained for another job."

Nearly 60% of respondents making between $10,000 and $25,000 dollars a year said it's either "somewhat or very difficult" to make an occupational change. Community Action Partnership of North Dakota said the survey also revealed these individuals are finding it harder to meet basic needs amid rising inflation, but also can't afford to pursue a better-paying job.

Ashley Littlewolf, workforce development case manager lead at the Southeastern North Dakota Community Action Agency, said she sees a lot of overlap with these barriers.

"They're feeding each other, the barriers are increasing each other," she said. "That need for new skills, and then finding the day care - and also, the jobs not paying enough."

While some employers are offering better pay, Littlewolf said the findings should prompt more action to boost starting wages. She said expanding the hiring pool can help, too.

"Taking a chance on someone who may not have that experience," she said, "but offering on-site training, offering the opportunity for them to enter that career path without the experience or education."