From: clifto@indep1.UUCP (Cliff Sharp)
Newsgroups: misc.jobs.misc
Subject: Re: Getting your own benefits...(was Re: Proud of overworking...)
Date: 7 Nov 92 22:45:15 GMT
Organization: as little as possible

In article <1992Nov5.032254.10967@RedBrick.COM> jfr@RedBrick.COM writes:
>  I don't get this.  Family leave is potentially valuable to everyone.

   Except the employer.  He's without the services he hired you for,
for some nonspecific period, and he has the choice of hiring temps or
losing the services he hired you for.  If you've priced temps, you know
why the employer isn't too happy about the whole deal.

>  For instance, it permits taking leave to assist your parents, your
>  brothers or sisters, etc. if they become seriously ill.  It is NOT
>  solely for parents.  Of course, if none of your family ever becomes
>  sick, it doesn't help you.  But then the government mandates both
>  Social Security, unemployment insurance and worker's comp.  In all

   I'm disabled with a severe back injury.  All of the above-mentioned
Government agencies screwed me royally, and I have NO income at this 
time.
   Unemployment compensation cut me off unconditionally because of the Chicago
Tribune's practice of using dead addresses ("send resume WITH SALARY HISTORY
to box M67712, Chicago IL 60632); they told me that although it might be true
that all the jobs I qualified for were sent with blind addresses, they wouled
not accept them.  An appeal got me the same answer.
   When I finally sunk low enough to apply for Public Aid, they set up an
appointment; in writing, I have it that they were supposed to call ME.  The
day came and went, and I got in writing a notice that *I* failed to keep *my*
appointment with *them*.  Phone company records show no attempt on their part
to make contact.  (Lawsuit is forthcoming.)
   Unemployment insurance?  Perhaps for you rich folk, but not in the range
of _my_ income.  (Talking about the private-sector type, not the Unemployment
Compensation government thing previously mentioned.)
   My wife is currently working _two_ jobs to keep our rent paid and to keep
a little food in our mouths (remember, this isn't steak, it's more like
cans of soup and tuna, occasionally on a good week we get some hamburger).

   Now, tell me how you're experience has gone.  I'd really like to hear from
someone who's had better experiences from our Government and/or private
insurance agencies.  It would certainly be nice to hear from someone who hasn't
been royally screwed by Uncle Sam.
>  three cases, if you need it its great but if you don't it is worthless.
>  That is the principal behind most insurance (i.e., spread the risk
>  by having each member of the pool contribute a little bit to pay for
>  the few people who actually have the problem).  With family leave,
>  the issue has even less impact because their is NO requirement that
>  the company pay for the leave (except for continuation of benefits).
>  All they must do is guarantee your job during the term of the leave.
>  I agree that there are difficulties in small companies (10 or so
>  employees) with respect to job skills replacement during the leave
>  period.  But those problems are always possible.   People leave
>  jobs all the time and companies manage until they find replacements.
>  With family leave, it is unlikely that they will need a replacement
>  for a short leave and likely they can find some kind of part time
>  or temporary fill-in for long ones, if they need one.
>
>  Jon Rosen


-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   Cliff Sharp  |      clifto@indep1.chi.il.us   OR  clifto@indep1.uucp       |
|     WA9PDM     |                 Use whichever one works                     |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: misc.jobs.misc