Should Unemployed People Work for Free?

[babylonsister]

http://www.parade.com/news/intelligence-report/archive/091011-should-unemployed-people-work-for-free.html

Should Unemployed People Work for Free?


More than half a million Americans are filing new unemployment claims each week, relying on state benefits to keep them afloat as they spend their days looking for jobs. But in Georgia, thousands of unemployed people are working without a salary in “auditions” for paying gigs.

Under the Georgia Works program, jobless citizens work part-time for up to six weeks at businesses with job openings. They earn no salary, but the state pays unemployment benefits along with a weekly stipend for transportation, child care, and other expenses. And while the businesses involved don’t issue paychecks, they do provide valuable on-the-job training, according to Michael Thurmond, the state’s labor commissioner. So far, some 3000 Georgians (58% of participants) have been hired at the places where they started working for free. Thurmond calls it a “win, win, win” program that has helped the unemployed find work; saved employers nearly $15 million in labor, hiring, and training costs; and saved the state $5.3 million in benefits it would have paid to people who remained unemployed. At least 17 other states have asked about starting similar programs.

Still, there are critics. Andrew Stettner of the National Employment Law Project says that unemployed workers should spend their time looking for the right job. He fears the Georgia program could lead to mandatory unpaid work for the unemployed if it were replicated in other states. “The purpose of unemployment ought to be to enable people to search for suitable work, not to give employers free labor,” he says.

— J. Scott Orr

[Bluzmann57]

1. No

Short and to the point. One should do a job, get paid, and spend their money however they see fit. That's economics 101.

[timtom]

53. Strongly second that "No."

[ddeclue]

2. Ummm Lincoln freed the slaves Georgia..

:crazy:

[Thickasabrick]

8. +100

[Rebubula]

22. Minor difference...

...they are not forcing anyone to do this. These folks get OJT and some good contacts. They get a stipend (probably pretty freaking modest) to help cover some other costs.

This is a tough market and lots of people are hurting. I would take a wait and see attitude to see if this program works out. As someone said earlier...this seems a bit like being an intern. More than half got permanent positions after the program.

But, if making this about slavery or something makes you feel better...well..good for you.

[Thickasabrick]

23. Meh...Georgia government sucks....Sonny Perdue is a selfish, republican

slimeball. If he had anything to do with it, it will suck

[ddeclue]

39. Slaves got "on the job training" too...and worked for a lot of important people too..

just ask the Hemmings...

remind me..what's your point again exactly?

[Greyhound]

71. Thus spake...

[elehhhhna]

111. More than half got permanent positions after the program. Means that

half the participating employers were going to hire, anyway, and got a 6 week freebie.

[northernlights]

120. or more than half are using it to get free labor

Sorry, you just aren't a "right fit" for our company. Next...

[Gman2]

127. Further, the workers/slaves, would be kicked off, if they refuse to remain McJobbed!

[northernlights]

121. and the more than half that didn't get hired

were they replaced by more free labor? Or were they just brought in to cover while others were on vacation, and never going to be hired to begin with?

So many opportunities to exploit, so little time....

[Maru Kitteh]

63. No kidding! That was my first thought. +1

[Greyhound]

70. Well, he thought he did at any rate.

"I freed a thousand slaves, I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves" - Harriet Tubman

[walldude]

3. Seems to me that while this may be working right now

the openings for abuse are immense. Who's to stop them from not actually hiring the people and just keep turning them over like a slave labor pool.

[dysfunctional press]

87. up to 42% of the employers are already doing that.

nt

[Brickbat]

4. No. This is a horrid idea. Not a surprise, though -- the south LOVES its cheap labor.

Takes great pride in it, in fact.

I think it's really, really sad that people think they should be grateful for "a chance" for "training" like this. Is that all they're worth?

[Warpy]

5. All jobs need to pay a living wage

That applies as much to marginal work as to any other type.

Unfortunately, we've gotten so used to starvation wages that I suppose no wages will start to make sense to people.

Unless one is donating time to church or charity, it should be illegal to be asked to work without pay.

[demwing]

93. A living wage is no longer $10 per hour. It is at least $15, if not more

It all depends on your rent, and how badly the local utility company wants to sock you.

[sohndrsmith]

102. I agree with your specifications, but I'm guessing you base this on a single person

with no dependents. Having an infant to support and/or family to feed makes $15.00 an hour pretty unrealistic. I don't know - what do you think?

[Warpy]

126. And it's higher in a lot of cities

A living wage should allow you to live in safe housing, eat cheap but nutritious food (including fruit and veg in season), and go to the doctor when you're sick. That's just bare subsistence.

That's what marginal workers should get, at the very least.

Instead, they're living in homeless shelters or camper shells on cinder blocks, eating trash food that supplies calories without nutrition, and if they get sick, they just have to hope they get better because there is no way to get care.

This is disgraceful. This whole country has gotten to be disgraceful.

[Obamanaut]

6. If they are working part time on the job training, and they are getting

money from someone, in this case the state - they are not working for free. The state is paying for their OJT.

Since it is part time, they have time to seek other employment if they so desire - "...the right job..." In the meantime, they have some money coming in.

[ctaylors6]

11. I agree. Since it's only 6 weeks and 58% have been hired permanently

it seems like government subsidized otj training, including the stipend for child care and transportation.

I also agree with the article that it wouldn't be so great if it's a longer term program. But I would think even a good chunk of the 42% who haven't gotten permanently hired might still have gotten a good recommendation and some new skills.

[Hannah Bell]

12. they're working for private companies = subsidy to business from state $$.

= drives down wages.

[Obamanaut]

16. Perhaps this will make it more palatable. They are at a business

that has no job openings.

They are getting unemployment, child care, transportation. They would normally be getting unemployment, so the other stuff is just perks.

They are "volunteering" at the business (while on unemployment) that has no openings, because they have a well developed work ethic and cannot abide sitting at home idle bemoaning their sad lot in life whilst they peruse the want ads endlessly, mail resumes, and phone bank trying to get their foot in a door, any door.

Oh look, their foot is in the door at a 50% success rate.

There are so many people for whom any idea is a bad idea unless it is their idea.

[Hannah Bell]

27. no, it doesn't. they're doing work for the company & getting paid by the state &

the rest = bullshit apologetics for this fascist arrangement.

[Obamanaut]

49. You are absolutely correct. Much better that people who want to

work rather than sit on their asses watching Oprah not participate in any such program. They can visit with Dr Oz and find out what book to read.


Now, where is that sarcasm thingy. :sarcasm:

[Hannah Bell]

98. if the companies have work, they can pay the workers themselves. what don't you get?

they're PRIVATE companies, making PRIVATE profits.

You want a jobs program? Fine, GOVERNMENT jobs. They can hire back all the people they're laying off while they're funneling public money into PRIVATE pockets.

[Thothmes]

59. Your proposal is to let them set at home and wait?

[Raineyb]

62. Are you saying that they cannot find ways to pass the time without

being given busywork by the state?

[Hannah Bell]

99. My proposal is to not give public money to PRIVATE corporations in the form of free labor.

Thereby giving them the incentive to lay off & lower the wages of their paid workforce.

You're a *Democrat*? I don't believe it. this is a republican wet dream, & just one step from the german arrangements pre-WWII.

It makes me sick to hear "Democrats" supporting it.

[elehhhhna]

113. Thereby giving them the incentive to lay off & lower the wages of their paid workforce.

excellent point.

[elehhhhna]

112. Social welfare for corporations. again.

[Fumesucker]

29. Umm.. If the businesses had no openings then how did the program get an over 50% success rate?

That doesn't compute, to me anyway.

Oh and FWIW I live in GA and the employment outlook here is execrable.

[ctaylors6]

43. it's when there are job openings

here's another article about the program: http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=424233


The employers have to certify that they intend to immediately hire for the position. This article says many get hired before the 6 weeks are up.

[Fumesucker]

47. Then the post I to which I replied was wrong..

I was going on the assumption the poster had a clue.. Bad assumption, I know. :)

[Obamanaut]

55. I read the OP incorrectly and inserted a "no" where there was none.

Sorry for the confusion I caused in your thread.

[Obamanaut]

46. Umm.. I didn't write the article, I simply read it. Here is a quote from

the OP/article

"So far, some 3000 Georgians (58% of participants) have been hired at the places where they started working for free. Thurmond calls it a “win, win, win” program that has helped the unemployed find work; saved employers nearly $15 million in labor, hiring, and training costs; and saved the state $5.3 million in benefits it would have paid to people who remained unemployed."

If you have questions as to the accuracy or veracity of the numbers, you might consider checking with the author at the link in the OP.

There are interns working at places with no job openings. Is it just barely possible that if interns (or the workers in the GA program do well) an opening will be made? Is it?

[Fumesucker]

50. You were the one who posted that they were at a business that had no openings..

I was replying to you as if you had a clue, my mistake.

[Obamanaut]

52. I misread the OP. Read it too quickly, Inserted a "no" where there

was none. And when you walk on water, do your socks get wet?

[Fumesucker]

54. Only if the ice melts..

If it's cold enough and my feet are already cold, not so much. :)

I can only read and respond to what you write, my mindreading only works face to face, not over teh intertoobz.

[ecstatic]

64. On the surface it seems like a good idea, BUT the way it was peddled

to us is: "Take this person on and you can just get rid of them in 6 weeks and get someone else!" Not sure if they are presenting the program that way to all the employers (I'm guessing they're not if the 58% hired statistic is true).

[Greyhound]

73. The Obamanaut favors the fascist state.

Well what's wrong with making it mandatory? After all they are just leeching off the taxpayers.

And how about putting those that might have the temerity to refuse in jail?

[Karmadillo]

7. Yes, at least until we need them for Soylent Green.

nt

[notadmblnd]

9. So the government is paying people to work for a company for free?

How come socialism is bad for the individual but not bad for corporations?

[BadgerKid]

10. Because otherwise it would be

unamerican.

:sarcasm:

[MindPilot]

13. Isn't that what we used to call internships?

I can see good on both sides of this. It enables employers to thoroughly vet a potential employee first. Hiring someone only to find out in a few weeks they are not a good "fit" is really expensive for employers. And the employee gets the same chance. And who knows if employers can save some money here, they might just hire more people.

On the employee's side it may very well open up opportunities for jobs they would not otherwise be able to take because of that training factor. It would also give people the opportunity to explore new jobs they may not have considered otherwise.

As long there are tight controls, people continue to receive full benefits in lieu of wages, and it's not exploited into "free labor", I see where such a program could have some advantages.

[Hannah Bell]

33. the state doesn't pay for internships. the people are working for corps & getting paid

by taxpayers, most likely less than the market value of the work.

it's called "fascism".

[pipoman]

83. For 6 weeks.....keeerist

The state and fed gov. pays for schooling through grants and scholarships. It is simply long enough for an employer to see if the person works out. Job training is a looser for any business. Productivity is highest with trained people, if someone is given a chance to prove themselves and it places people who really need jobs, voluntarily, why not sit back and see if Georgia's unemployment drops.

I have been hired 2 times in my life simply by offering to work for free...I can't stand sitting on my ass.

[Hannah Bell]

96. It's the state (under)paying the labor costs for private businesses, no matter how

you rationalize it.

If they have work that needs doing, let them pay for it themselves. It's not the gov't's business to pay "to see if they work out". That's a cost of doing business.

[pipoman]

109. The gov isn't doing it for the businesses

it is doing it for desperately unemployed people. It is the state's job to assist the unemployed. Job service centers have been offering various types of assistance for decades including basic job training, resume' workshops, interview skills workshops, etc. Some people just are too full of themselves to believe that they are not all that, that they must sell themselves to a prospective employer, then must work hard...even go above and beyond, to get a decent job. Six weeks at a reduced rate and the benefit to business of being able to try before they buy (the employee) is an incentive to try a person who may not otherwise make the cut. I really think the only people who would oppose such an attempt to stimulate jobs are those who either lazy and believe that they should be employed just because they need a job or the types who remain on unemployment until it runs out because they can.

[Raineyb]

132. Of course it is. Otherwise the business would have to do so out of its own pockets

As well it should, I might add. All the services that the job centers provide is to help the person find a job. However, having the person work at less than prevailing wage helps the EMPLOYER so they don't have to be bothered to pay out of pocket. Any time an employer takes on a new employee there's always a chance that there isn't a match. That's part of the risk of being an entrepreneur. It's not the job of the government to subsidize that part of the business owner's risk especially when it does so at the cost of the labor pool.

I have no idea where you got your rather nasty view of the worker especially in light of the number of people unemployed but people are not necessarily unemployed because they are bad workers. Nor is the difficulty in getting work necessarily due to them having overdeveloped views of themselves.

I can't believe the amount of people looking down their nose at workers and excusing the blatant undercutting of the labor pool out on an DEMOCRATIC board.

Unfuckingbelievable.

[pipoman]

134. I see first hand

the low productivity and poor work ethic of many people in the work force. Reliability, responsibility, and trustworthiness are major issues. Certainly not all unemployed people are bad workers, I am sure some are great workers...probably those participating in this program. A six week trial may get people off of unemployment much quicker, it remains to be seen. To proclaim the 6 week program to be fascist or some kind of corporate handout is just silly, in fact blinded by naivety. And the feigned anger is just another 'I'm entitled to more' foot stomping.

[Raineyb]

146. Naive? No, it's not. The government is paying people out of the unemployment rolls

instead of the business for which the person is working paying them. It can't be any clearer that the government is doing something FOR the business.

You seem to be under the impression that the business is entitled to "trial run" people for free. They are not. And for the government to subsides that is absolutely unacceptable mingling of business and government.

And as for entitlement it seems to me that you have absolutely no problem with entitlement so long as it's the business that gets to be entitled.

Furthermore, it's not up to you to look down your nose at people to decide whether or not they are worthy of work unless you're the employer. As a tax payer it certainly would be up to the citizen to make sure that the government is not subsidizing businesses without some brown-nosing nitwit decrying the citizenry for daring to insist that businesses pay for their own damn employees instead of trying to get work out of people for free. If these businesses really need someone they can hire someone and pay for them OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS. They are NOT entitled to turn to the government to weasel free labor out of the labor market. What part of that do you not understand?

[sohndrsmith]

103. Internships are not offered to older, displaced workers - many of whom would

likely jump at the chance to prove their skills. But by not being a new college grad (or currentlyenrolled) their skills or talents are overlooked for internships.

[Umbral]

149. I just can't imagine a businessman abusing such a program...

Wait, that's actually all I can imagine.

[dbonds]

14. It should not be for free.

It would be a good program if it was all of the above plus some pay for the audition. The pay doesn't have to be full pay but a substantial percentage, the other part of the pay should go back into the state unemployment fund. This way there is no incentive for a prospective employer to keep auditioning new workers just for cheap labor.

[Lance_Boyle]

18. maybe they get a share of the office donuts

or some of the bad office coffee?

[dbonds]

20. You missed the point that it should still cost the company full price.

[MindPilot]

28. Why should it cost the company full price?

The company is providing training which means the person they are training is not a fully productive employee. Also when someone is being trained, that reduces the productivity of the person doing the training as well. (unless of course "trainer" is in their job description.)

As long as it is a training program and doesn't morph into free labor, it looks like a good program.

[dbonds]

36. Because it is free labor.

The company has a job opening and someone is doing the work free. The worker 'might' be getting some on the job training, but they are also not getting full pay.

[Hannah Bell]

97. Let the company pay the "training" wage then. Currently, it's free to the company.

Why is the gov't subsidizing private profits?

Let them fund their state & local governments & rehire everyone they laid off.

If private companies have work they need done, let them pay for it themselves, or nationalize their profits.

[asdjrocky]

15. First, let me ask the most important questioned asked in America today-

How will this make rich people richer?

[Jkid]

17. Should Unemployed People Work for Free?

[Ruby the Liberal]

19. I wonder how this squares with ERISA, OSHA, Worker's Comp, etc...

Are they considered "employees" and "on the clock"?

[TheKentuckian]

21. Nice of the Confederates to create a program that reduces the need for paid workers.

At best this is a pretemp set up, subsidized by the state. At worse exploitation of needy people to get 6 weeks of indentured servitude.

[doc03]

24. So I am laid off from a job that paid $25-30 an hour

with benefits and they are going to force me on OJT at Walmart for minimum wage and no benefits. Sounds like the F-----g south.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

80. Who are they forcing to work?

[doc03]

88. It could lead to being forced. The person at the unemployment

office says you can start a job training at McDonalds next week while you draw your unemployment. What this will lead to is they will say we offered you work and you wouldn't accept it so we are terminating your unemployment. Now if you agree to take the job then after your six weeks training the employer offers you a full time job and you refuse it your unemployment will be terminated. My understanding unemployment is meant to give you temporary income while you look for (suitable work), it is not intended as a free temporary employment service for employers. If a company needs people have them hire them and train them for the job with their own money. You know where this started was the Workfare program where people on welfare were forced to work for their welfare checks. My brother was one that couldn't find work after his unemployment ran out so they made him travel 90 miles to work for minimum wage while the government subsidized the employer for giving him a job. After the training period is over they get rid of that trainee and get a replacement rather than pay into compensation, unemployment and benifits. Of course this is in the south home of scab labor and Republicans I would expect that.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

128. I didn't ask what could happen. I'm well aware of the possible repercussions.

[doc03]

135. And yet it appears you support it, you don't even

declare what state you live in. Since you say SE I suppose you are in one of those anti-union Right To Work for Less states.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

136. Support it? What gives you that idea. I am a union member.

[doc03]

137. You came to the defence of the idea saying where does it

they are forcing anyone to work, then you sort of agree it could result in that. I don't know where you stand actually.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

138. I just didn't see where that was and asked you about it.

:shrug: :toast:

[doc03]

140. Here is my situation, I am laid off

from a job that paid $25-30 an hour plus benefits. When laid off in addition to unemployment we receive supplementary unemployment benefits(SUB)from our employer that gives us over $600 a week take home. In addition to that we remain on the company heath insurance plan for 2 years and our pensions are funded for 2 years. I will also be 62 years old early next year and plan to retire. What concerns me is what Ohio would do if we had a system like the one in Georgia. I can see them offering us training on a low paying job with no benefits, then if you turn it down disqualifying you for unemployment. Then if you accept the OJT after training you would be put in the position of taking a job that may pay half as much with no benefits or if you turn it down you loose the Unemployment. I have heard of some of our laid off workers that had a Commercial Drivers Licence being forced to take truck driving jobs that pay less than our unemployment.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

142. Sorry for the situation hope it improves.

[tinkerbell41]

148. I'm with you

Same for me. I was offered free tuition to train for a new job. It is a gift, I should be grateful.
But the only schooling, training offered, is for positions that might pay 10-15 an hour. I make 40
on the check. Granted, I am laid-off now, but I'm supposed to walk away from my trade, to make 30 an hour less?? More school for less pay???? How do you make that decision? I clawed my way out of a bad situation 20 yrs ago, set up a nice middle class life for myself and kid, got her off to college, and now I have to come to terms with going right back where I came from. At least she has a better shot than I did.

[doc03]

90. You know industry moving to the south for cheap

labor was the start to the race to the bottom. Step 1: Back in the 70's manufactureiig started moving south for non-union labor. Step 2: Southern non-union became too expensive so they invented NAFTA to move those factories to Mexico for even cheaper labor. Step 3: Then even Mexican labor became too costly so they found even cheaper labor in Asia. Now we have Walmart that forces the Asian peoples wages lower and lower in order to get work.

[KillCapitalism]

95. Asian labor is becoming too expensive now.

If you haven't noticed, the Chinese are pumping a lot of money into Africa, but I don't think it's because they care about those poor black people.

[doc03]

117. Interesting and we complain it is a jobless

recovery.

[lob1]

25. It's like working on a chaingang without doing the crime.

[Burma Jones]

26. I sure did when I was unemployed.........it's called looking for work

and getting by doing whatever low paying temp shit you can get your hands on.

This program in Georgia is bullshit. Unemployment is insurance already bought and paid for by employers. If GEICO asked me to come around and clean their bathrooms because I filed a claim I would go smack someone upside their head.

[Incitatus]

30. So companies can lay off workers and the state will give them workers for free?

[Romulox]

31. If they just used prisoners, the companies wouldn't ever have to "hire" anyone at all!

Errr....

[Gman2]

32. Theys missin' theys chaingangs.

[busybl]

34. Charles Dickens London lives

[BOG PERSON]

51. Maybe so, but it doesn't live in America

[jaxx]

35. In most states it's illegal to have someone work for you without paying them the pervailing wage.

They did away with this with overtime pay, instead of giving free time to the companies.

This is taking advantage of the unemployed. Unemployment benefits are not 100% of a wage.

Leave it to Georgia.

[Raineyb]

37. WTF? If they're working at a business they should be getting a SALARY

This looks like a program to undercut the labor market.

[blindpig]

38. What a racket

Both punitive and a give-away to business interests, a two-fer for reactionaries.

[REP]

40. Oh hell no

"On the job training" my ass. Receiving unemployment means that one used to have a job and lost it due to reasons other than misconduct, which means these people know how to work. If a job requires six weeks (or three at full time) to learn it, that time should be paid at regular wages, just like every job I've ever had. This is a handout to corporations and a kick in the teeth to desperate, broke workers.

[doc03]

41. That is why William Tecumseh Sherman is

my favorite General.

[JVS]

81. A toast to the General!

:toast:

[Yo_Mama]

42. They're not working for free

This is an effort by GA to help find people (who would much rather be working than on unemployment) find jobs.

For what it is worth, working in a volunteer capacity is one of the ways that unemployed people can make contacts and show skills, and has helped people I know find jobs. I have a serious illness, and this is how I found work.

Any program with a 58% success rate is very good, and the businesses do have job openings, and the people involved are getting paid for the costs of working, plus receiving their unemployment benefits. It seems to me like a very good proposition.

Doing it this way allows motivated people without paper qualifications to get a chance to show what they can do without the company taking a chance that they will have to fire some one (and raise their unemployment rates). That fear can prevent companies from hiring people who could be great employees but haven't had the previous chance to show that they are competent in that job function (which is often more a factor of not having money than anything else). This is a MUCH better alternative for the unemployed than having to go to school to get some certification.

It is not compulsory, and of course never should be. As long as it is not compulsory, there is no fear that people will be forced to work for their unemployment benefits. Many job training programs for younger people have historically operated in much the same way.

The problem is not with the program - it is in the fact that the economy is so bad in GA that a program so beneficial to both companies and the unemployed has had less than 10,500 participants, which implies that most companies just don't have job openings.

There is another valuable thing about this program. It earns the potential employee good will from the potential employer, and even if the person is not a good fit for the job, the employer may be impressed with the person's character and be able to refer the jobseeker to a company that has a job opening more suitable and provide a personal reference. Business owners know other business owners.

Michael Thurmond is a truly great man, much admired by Georgians. Here's a brief bio:
http://www.thehistorymakers.com/biography/biography.asp?bioindex=929&category=PoliticalMakers

In GA the Labor Commissioner is an elective position, and there is a reason why Thurmond gets reelected time after time. A good reason. A VERY good reason.

The "Georgia Works" thing is actually a family of programs. Under Thurmond, the Dept of Labor makes special efforts to find released prisoners jobs, older displaced workers jobs, etc. Thurmond had done more for Georgia than any non-Georgian could possibly understand. He understand what it is like to be a disadvantaged person trying to get a toehold.

[Raineyb]

44. You do realize you just contradicted yourself in 2 sentences right?

Working in a volunteer capacity = working for free.

[Yo_Mama]

60. No, I didn't go through this program

I actually did work for free. This is a big cut above that.

However doing volunteer work if you are unemployed can be very beneficial. Part of unemployment is the soul-deadening worry, and it can help to just get out and concentrate on something else.

[Raineyb]

61. If these businesses need people they can hire them. For a salary the way

it works when one is a for profit entity. The state has no business having people on unemployment work for businesses while the money is coming from the state. Anyone who works for the business should get paid BY THE BUSINESS. Otherwise, we have the government pimping out unemployed workers (and possibly threatening them with the cessation of benefits to boot) The government has no business allowing for profit businesses in the state to lower its costs (and increase its profits) by paying the person unemployment which is less than what the worker was making as a full time worker, instead of paying the full full time wage.

Furthermore, it is one thing to volunteer one's time; it is quite another to have the state, which has the threat to cut off funds "suggesting" one go into a program where you work full time for less than full time pay.

In addition, I find going back to school a hell of a lot more beneficial while unemployed.

[treestar]

45. NO

The "training" is likely to be BS, but at any rate, we do enough training ourselves for employer's needs. They ought to train their own people.

This is the taxpayers paying for some company to "audition" someone? Work should be paid for, period. This takes the "you're lucky you have a job" so far that it's dangerous.

Slavery was abolished in 1863.

[Blue-Jay]

48. I wouldn't mind if they were working in non-profits, government

or other taxpayer-supported agencies. I see that similar to WPA-style efforts and think there should be more of that. People want the dignity of work and a chance to gain skills.

However, I have I HUGE problem with for-profit companies getting labor at no charge to them. This is a massive corporate welfare scam. Taxpayers are subsidizing PRIVATE businesses who can use this free labor and then pay their CEOs million-dollar salaries, all at the expense of hard-working Americans, at least those lucky enough to still have a job.

How is this capitalism? What happened to magic hand of the free market? For-profit companies should pay for their labor.

[Withywindle]

65. Yup, that's exactly the difference.

I've worked for free. I bet more people on this board have than haven't - but volunteer work is something one CHOOSES to do, and it's usually for a not-for-profit and for some cause or organization one believes in. Political campaigns, animal shelters, soup kitchens, a school, a church, AA, Girl Scouts, an underground zine, hell, even the local symphony orchestra. Work that has meaning to the worker is not the same as poverty-pimping forced busywork.

The difference is in being pressured to do it to make someone else richer for no greater good than pushing money around. That is heading into Dickensian workhouses and debtors' prisons territory.

[Lars39]

56. Good grief, people.

The program does not have a 100% success rate. 42% are getting royally screwed, while the only 58% are working for free until they are hired, allowing those companies doing the hiring to get free work that they would normally have to pay for. Bottom line: the state has become a temp agency, subsidizing companies.

[Blue Diadem]

57. It's another free ride for the corporations. They get to save $15 million in labor

hiring and training. For the 42% who don't get the job, they lose that 6 weeks of unemployment that they could use while looking for another job.

[BOG PERSON]

58. Well if they offer to cover basic living expenses, I don't see the injustice.

It depends on the weekly stipend amount, obviously.

The title of the article makes the program sound almost Swiftian, when it isn't all that bad, really.

[Hannah Bell]

100. it bloody well is. sure, maybe the gov could just house them in dorms & cover their food.

Then it would be *just* like this:

[tonysam]

66. WTF is the point?

It is a waste of time and taxpayer money to do something for free when people need REAL work.

[Yo_Mama]

78. The point is...

That Thurmond went out and talked to companies. These people don't replace "real" jobs, because the maximum they can work is six weeks and 24 hours a week. While they are working they have more than enough time to look for other jobs. They do not lose their unemployment benefits - they still get them.

This proposal was developed specifically for small businesses and start-ups who are thinking of expanding but are cautious of the risk, and it apparently has caused some to add jobs. It basically replaces an unpaid internship with a combination of unemployment plus cost credit to employee plus workers comp paid for the internship time. Even if the employee isn't hired the company has to give a certification for the training/experience. Both companies and the unemployed have to apply, and the program is supervised by GA Dept of Labor.

As for exploitation of the employees, a while back there was considerable discussion about the discriminatory effects of corporate internships. Because poorer people, heads of households, etc HAVE TO WORK, these programs effectively screen out lower-class people and favor people from middle and upper-class backgrounds. The GA program most here are assaulting is an attempt to provide the same level of access and exposure to job opportunities to disadvantaged people who may be great workers.

Notably, a 58% success rate in a very bad economy kind of proves the point of those were earlier speculating about the class discrimination problem with unpaid internships.

Thurmond is a Democrat - not the artsy-fartsy kind, but a real old-fashioned Democrat who knows what it is to find yourself in the dust and is bent on helping people to climb out of it. If there were any justice, this guy would have gotten national recognition by now. In GA, we know his value.

I do not know him, I do not work for him, I get no income from this program or from the GA Dept of Labor, I am not related to him, and he is never going to know that I am posting this.

Why do people here think that 17 other states are looking at this program? It is because it is working very well. The cost of hiring someone to a small business, and investing the training time, is very high, especially when you don't know if the employee will work out. And maybe you can't afford to pay that much. But still there is a potential job there, and for younger people or displaced workers who have been trying to acquire skills, it can be a godsend. And some of these companies succeed, and expand.

[jmowreader]

67. Just as long as it's not retail

I don't think this is too bad--as long as the employers are teaching them how to do something skilled, and not "this is how to ask if you want fries with that."

[Extend a Hand]

68. bwahahahahaha!

f*ckers. we are ruled by corporations.

[anonymous171]

69. No. Corporatism is bad.

[Greyhound]

72. The definition of fascism, and it has it's advocates here.

My God, if we get any dumber we won't be able to find food on a daily basis.

[bobbolink]

74. Sounds like another government giveaway to business.

Just say NO!

[onehandle]

75. Georgia sucks in every way. Do nothing we do here. nt

[havocmom]

76. Not until the rich turn over their wealth and open their doors to the homeless

ALL of them.

They can't expect capitalism and slavery to work together. It won't

[AlienGirl]

77. This will drive down the cost of labor even worse than outsourcing or prison labor has!

There is nothing to stop companies from using this program to obtain a succession of unpaid workers for jobs that don't require much training (for example, cashier jobs, for which training's usually only a couple of days) and circulating through the available labor pool without ever filling those positions with a paid worker.

Tucker

[pipoman]

86. Any manager knows

that it is extremely hard to find good help...that's not simply a cliche', it's a fact. There isn't any manager who wants to retrain an unknown every 6 weeks unless the help they have is no good. Not showing up, tardiness, thieves, answering simple questions for 2 or 3 weeks, having to babysit, none of it is worth the hassle...once good help is found you keep them. What you are describing will be few and far between.

[AlienGirl]

91. In my experience, not at the lower end of retail work--the de-skilled and unskilled jobs. nt

[pipoman]

110. That is where I do most of my hiring (restaurant wait and dish room help)

and these types of jobs are in fact the hardest to find reliable people to fill. More money can fly out the door on these types of employees than on skilled laborers. When I have trained staff, I can use my time doing managerial tasks which makes my time more productive. I can do (and often do) every job in the restaurant including waiting tables and washing dishes...it just isn't good use of my time as my pay is higher because of other skills I possess. How did I get those skills? I changed careers in my 40's, my previous career paid high 5/low 6 figures. When I decided I wanted into the restaurant business I started at $8 per hour to prove myself, 8 months later I was managing the restaurant.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

79. If they want to.

[TheWebHead]

82. Ditto if they want to

and if their benefits are extended, the payout should steadily decline unless they agree to take a part time work for free job, if available, when one is offered. The problem w/ the current unemployment benefits is that people are incentivized to refuse a lower paying job even when benefits have been extended multiple times. It would have to be limited to a small percentage of a co's workforce and would have to be temporary or otherwise abuses would happen.

[tonysam]

85. Sure UI "incentivizes" people to refuse lower paying jobs

because those jobs are "beneath" them, and never mind the few jobs that are out there don't pay enough for the rent or for necessities.

God, I am sick, sick, sick of reading this garbage being repeated that we who are on UI are too lazy to take other jobs and we just enjoy sitting around on our asses.

Never mind the fact the money runs out eventually.

[JVS]

84. No. And companies/ individuals who exploit such desparation should be fined heavily.

[EndersDame]

89. Sometimes I cry because the length that America goes to fuck the poor no longer shocks me

I am a little bit of a kidder and a flair for the dramatics but still it is pretty much de riguer , richer more powerful people try to find any way to take their misery out on us common folk.

[demwing]

92. Its a little different in Florida

The WorkNet program here, designed for those receiving cash assistance, is as follows:

Those on cash assistance must engage in 35 mandatory hours per week of basic assessments (simple math, reading, and writing). You must complete these online assessments before you can begin to get credit for Job searching. You must complete these online assessments in the WorkNet office. Often, there is a line, hours long, before a computer opens up, and you can begin your studies.

During your first week, before your case is officially "opened," if you complete your assessments ahead of schedule, you must review the material over and over for the remaining balance of your first 35 hours. The idea is to talley hours, not find work.

After your case is opened, you are assigned to a charitable organization for community service work, which is performed off site. Usually, you'll be cleaning a church, or feeding the homeless for about 20 hours per week. In addition to the community service, you'll get 20 hours further assessments and classes, which must be completed at the WorkNet office.

You are required to continue this schedule, a minimum of 35 hours per week, until you find a job.

When I participated, I received 250 dollars per month cash assistance, and 350 in food stamps. I am a single father, with a 14 year old boy.

Even adding the cash and food stamps, my total for the month was only $600 in aid. My rent is 150% that amount. But the really ugly part is that at 35 hours per week, every week of the month, my assistance equated to about $4.29 per hour.

$4.29 per hour.

That is slave labor, people, and the Churches of central Florida are reaping the benefits. It is a shame, and should be illegal.

[LeftyMom]

104. Sacramento County, CA does the same, but they can actually assign you to for-profit businesses.

Though they do the math so the required work hours aren't supposed to exceed what minimum wage would be for the cash benefits recieved. Still, I'm not sure how you're supposed to go better yourself and find work while assigned to some BS makework "job". And again, maximum payments aren't anywhere close to the local cost of rent.

[Hannah Bell]

108. yes, & 35 hours a week means if you're a single parent you need childcare.

what a farce.

[Regret My New Name]

94. If it's not required then I see little issue.

Of course it depends on the position. If it's something where the person can get real world experiences in a new field. If I was collecting unemployment and I had an opportunity to do something relevant, I would take it up in a heart beat.

[sohndrsmith]

101. I wonder what we call "production"/manufacturing of goods produced

by inmates in our county/state jails and prisons for pennies on the dollar... how do we square that as being something other than ___________(a word we're not comfortable to say?. Seems to me things haven't changed much... only the labels and descriptions have changed making the same practices we denounce somehow legitimate because "crimes" were committed (crimes that aren't exactly based on "equal rights"... just sayin'

[sohndrsmith]

105. Working for free = volunteerinng. It's not a bad way to shine within

a job enviroment, You have to be rather desperate, of course (which I am). : )

[Fumesucker]

106. Working for free can also = slavery..

De Debbil is in dem ol' details, don'tcha know.

[JonQ]

123. Remember when obama proposed mandatory volunteering

as part of a program to provide for government funded college education? And people called that slavery too? Yeah, it was an idiotic comparison then, and now.

[Fumesucker]

129. If it's mandatory it's not volunteering..

That's an abuse of the English language, IMHO.

I know how things roll down here in GA, there's an excellent chance this program or something similar will be made mandatory.

[JonQ]

145. I never said it was a well worded program

but the words "mandatory" and "volunteer" were used.

[Hannah Bell]

107. what's the deal with the unrecs?

[LWolf]

114. NO. nt

[Rabrrrrrr]

115. The south just does not want to give up slavery, does it? And now they got the gummint to pay for it

What a win-win for the businesses - they get lackeys they don't have to provide any benefits to, PLUS the state pays their wages while they're there!

And of course, these are all the same piles of shit who think welfare is a great evil - excepting, of course, when it's giving taxpayer money to corporations.

[unapatriciated]

116. Unemployment is an insurance that you pay into...

one shouldn't have to work to earn it back

[blueworld]

118. "the laborer is entitled to their wage". Who said that again?

This program is legalized slavery, obnoxious & I hope someone files suit to stop it.

If not, If Georgia thinks this is such a swell idea, how about if I "audition" some cars & appliances & food, and if I think they're good enough, I can pay a little for transportation later? It's good training for them, especially in customer relations, I think. :sarcasm:

[guitar man]

119. Fuck that

I've got better things to do with my time other than giving it away to some cigar smoking robber baron who is too cheap to pay people to work. More corporate welfare, that's all this is. :grr:

[JonQ]

122. Sounds like a subsidized internship

given the economic situation I would say this isn't such a bad thing.

And for the people comparing this to slavery answer me this: were slaves only expected to work for free if they volunteered? Could they quit at any time?

[aikoaiko]

124. If it helps get good people trained and hired and it voluntary, then it sounds like a good program.

It sounds like a creative program.

The critic says that the "unemployed workers should spend their time looking for the right job", but I think he's missing the point that a lot of unemployed workers just aren't finding the jobs because they aren't there or the workers don't have the skills.

The program takes the cost away from a business in recruitment, training, and selection.

If companies were merely exploiting free labor, then 58% wouldn't be getting hired.

[Cleita]

125. Slavery worked well for Georgia before the Civil War. It looks like they have

found a new way to bring it back. I have nothing against the govt. offering employment to unemployed people for a basic living wage until they find something better in the private sector. But forcing people to work for unemployment benefits that are even below minimum wage is pure slavery.

[JonQ]

130. Not mandatory right now

about like saying that planting a garden and working it for free in your back yard essentially makes you a slave, no different than in the 1800s.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

131. Cut to the chase. Make both unemployment and homelessness illegal

and then we can fill the prison industries with slave labor. I think that is the long term goal.

[AngryOldDem]

133. No. We don't need anyone parlaying this into modern-day slavery.

That's where this is headed, sure as shit.

[marshall]

139. There are many volunteer positions one can take until finding employment

It woudn't hurt to push programs that require volunteers, with the proviso that it is temporary.

[pitohui]

141. oh crap no lincoln freed the slaves

i don't even wanna hear the excuses abt why it's somehow good to create slaves in century 21

i hate humanity sometimes, we want to steal the limited hours of life itself apparently

[juno jones]

150. I agree, and love how you said it.

i hate humanity sometimes, we want to steal the limited hours of life itself apparently

What good are we if we are not serving them? They want to suck us dry. They want every waking moment either serving them or shopping for their products and when they can't get either we either are made slaves or allowed to die. Our time, which is so short here is the last thing of value and something I have often lived in 'genteel poverty' in order to enjoy freely.

They are vampires sucking out our lives and the finite time we have to live them.

[AdHocSolver]

143. What is wrong with this program? Let me enumerate the ways.

The assumptions that would make this program acceptable are that the worker has no employment history and no skills, and that the temporary jobs that they are assigned to requires some significant training.

However, if the person qualifies for unemployment, that means that they have an employment track record. They don't have to work for six weeks for "free" to demonstrate their capabilities and reliability anymore than any new hire.

Secondly, I worked temporary jobs when I was out of "permanent" work. This included factory work and clerical work. These kinds of jobs never took more than one or two days to learn. The fact that these people are required to work six weeks at low pay means that they are being exploited, as well as are the taxpayers of Georgia.

At one factory job that I worked at, I suffered trauma to my hands (the term a doctor friend used), and I quit after three days due to the pain. Since my taking the job was through a temp agency, and totally voluntary, I merely had the agency find me a different job. The people who worked there full time also had health issues from doing the work, but that was their main income source, and they had no choice.

If the state pays for the work, the work should be public service work, not state-paid work for a for-profit, private corporation.

[Vidar]

144. Sounds like 19th century workhouses. Forward into the Past!

[earth mom]

147. Hell to the NO! Isn't this what they used to call Indentured Servitude?

:grr: