IBJNews

Indiana unemployment insurance overhaul continues

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Workers taking voluntary buyouts will no longer be eligible for state unemployment benefits in Indiana beginning Saturday, and severance pay will be counted against unemployment payouts.

The changes are part of Indiana's plan to pay off a $2 billion loan that the state took from the federal government to continue paying unemployment claims.

Lawmakers approved an overhaul earlier this year of how unemployment benefits are paid out and how much businesses pay in to the system. The new limits on eligibility, coupled with new premiums businesses pay, should put the state's unemployment insurance trust fund back in the black, said Huntington Republican Rep. Dan Leonard.

"You can't just continue to pay more and more and more and take in less and less and less," Leonard said.

About a decade ago, when the trust fund had a $1.6 billion surplus, lawmakers expanded unemployment benefits and eligibility, and decreased the amount businesses paid into the fund. But by 2005, the fund was severely depleted. In 2008, the fund was bankrupt, and the state was forced to take the federal loan to cover increasing unemployment claims.

Leonard expects the loan to be paid back by 2018.

Lawmakers first passed increased taxes on Indiana businesses in 2009, to cover the costs of the loan and put the trust fund back in balance. But they reconsidered the measure this year and opted for more cuts to benefits and eligibility to ease the burden on businesses.

The changes come as Indiana and the nation continue to struggle with high unemployment. The state posted an 8.7 percent unemployment rate in August, while the national average stayed at 9.1 percent.

Opponents say the benefits are meant to tide over out-of-work residents while they retrain for new jobs, and cutting the benefits and eligibility makes it harder for them to find new work.

"What these changes do is diminish their ability to retrain for a new career and help Indiana's next economy prosper," said Indiana AFL-CIO President Nancy Guyott.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Good move
    Opponents say the benefits are meant to tide over out-of-work residents while they retrain for new jobs, and cutting the benefits and eligibility makes it harder for them to find new work.

    "What these changes do is diminish their ability to retrain for a new career and help Indiana's next economy prosper," said Indiana AFL-CIO President Nancy Guyott.

    Maybe that's what it's "meant" to do but the fact is hords of people don't retrain and look for work, they just keep on taking from the "money tree" until it's barren....and it is!

  • Welfare?
    Unemployment insurance is part of the welfare system.
  • unempl.ins.
    Why not overhaul the welfare system? I can't get any help because I "make" too much on unemployment. Now if I had a child that lived with me, I could get help. I have worked over 45 yrs. and just lost my job. My severance pay was already deducted from unempl. and it took another 7 wks. for me to get a unempl. check. Our goverment needs to weed out the users of welfare.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Doug Henning!

  2. These guy were thugs — they grew up in freaking Haughville! Smh, sigh. If the mayor needs/wants "quality" Black Hoosiers who are NOT corrupt, give me a call — I know plenty. Land bank info here - http://www.kubepharm.com/indylandbank/IndyLandBank.html

  3. Magician and illusionist!

  4. The basic idea of nice apartments with parking and retail is a good one, but this design seems overwhelmingly big/tall for Broad Ripple. The size could be disguised a bit with lots of big trees/landscaping, but the complex is too massive to blend in easily. That section of canal between College and Westfield will also need to be upgraded on both sides. Nice apartments facing onto a nice promenade with shade trees/plantings could bring together the canal towpath/Monon recreation, the outdoor seating at existing restaurants, and this project into something that upgrades the whole area. A plan for the whole stretch makes more sense than facing nice new housing onto what looks like a ditch. Is there a plan? Does the public have input? Who pays? The apartment idea seems to be reasonable, but Whole Foods is not a good idea for appropriate retail. Besides the store being physically too big, there are already Fresh Market at 54xCollege and Whole Foods in Nora for fancy groceries. Good Earth and Kroger are within walking distance of the Shell site. There are at least 7 grocery stores within a safe bike ride. Whole Foods would add nothing but traffic congestion. This design is on the right track, but there needs to be more work done to ensure that it blends in with and enhances the existing community. A project that large will set a tone for that whole part of town. It could be a real asset, but only if done right.

  5. I did not move to Zionsville to live in Carmel. This and the subsequent developments to follow will ensure a vanilla uniformity of strip malls and apartment buildings as we seek to bring our town down to the least common denominator. We were warned before recent elections that pro-development council members would make sure their friends (landowners and developers) would be able to make their millions off of the exploitation of Zionsville. Why in God's name would we sell out the best preserved small town in the State of Indiana?

ADVERTISEMENT