The people's voice., 1959-01-30

that anyone could seriously propose
it,.
, Goza also said. at has been said
that 800 of unemployment compen-
sation money is spent in the grocery
store this is just a guess
could make as good guess that 859 %
is spent in a saloon and be as near
right.
AL Root, legislative assistant ALL
CIO and labor member of the UCC,
defied employers to show where any
Christmas tree worker is now receiv-
ing benefits for work he did this fall.
He gave the committee prepared
graphs showing that % states have
higher benefits than Montana and 81
have longer benefits.
Joe Crosswhite, vice president of
the AFL-CIO, and business agent for
Operating Engineers Local 371 for
western Montana, said, "The wage
Garner, in fact, has a great stake in
the unemployment compensation fund.
/ 1t does not merely take the form
of assured benefits for unemploy-
ment. The wage Garner does in fact
pay into the unemployment compen-
sation fund.
"At the bargaining table the em-
ployer says that his payment for
unemployment compensation are a
part of my wage >. If these fringe
al e
that they are now paid they would
be negotiated as direct wage in
creases to the working man.
81 have always thought of the un-
employment compensation program
and the unemployment compensation
trust fund as a sort of reservoir like
an irrigation reservoir. The inlet take
from the total taxable wage which is
the source, and leads into the pool
which is the trust fund, and the bene-
fit payments are the outlet. This
reservoir is called on and drawn down
when the economy of the state is af-
fected by unemployment just like an
irrigation reservoir is drawn upon to
keep the crops healthy and green in
dry periods. Since this is the inten-
tion of the fund it is to be expected
that the fund will have a drawdown
each year, for instance in the field of
industry represented by my craft
where we know that there must be
unemployment during the winter sea-
son. The reservoir is kept at rea-
sonable high level so in the event
there is a particularly bad period of
unemployment like a drought year,
the drawdown can be increased and
is intended to be increased to keep
the economy strengthened"
sB 2, as pointed out in PV, January
l6, is by Smith (R-Lewis & Clark). It's
aim among other things is to drastic
silly cut back coverage of unemployed
workers, particularly seasonal work
ers, pregnant mothers and others pres
entity eligible for compensation pro-
yided they meet basic requirements of
The law
For your convenience, we reprint
short resumes of SB 18 and SB 19, as
published in last weeks VOICE:
sB 1S by Siderius, Dussault. La
Combe and Reardon, would revise the
figuring of "chargebacks" against en-
n clauses governing eligibility OF the
unemployed for jobless comp. 1t would
Llso provide machinery for bringing
I'll except elected public officials under
he act. SB 1S in addition would ex-
lude any supplemental unemployment
benefits received as a result of any
rec collective bargaining agreement
between employer and employees or
he agents of the employees from be-
ng considered as wages in determining
Eligibility for jobless benefits.
SB 10 by Siderius, LaCombe and Rear
on would increase maximum weekly
enefits for jobless workers from the
resent $32 to $40 and would extend
rom % to 33 weeks the maximum
ength of time am unemployed worker
ould receive benefits. Employer con-
ributions to the fund would be deter
1ined on the first $4,000 income of the
overed employee. SB 19 also would
TX the employer contribution at the
z per cent maximum until such time
s the compensation reserve fund ex-
eeded $38 million, at which time the
experience rating schedule of lower
ates put into the law in 1947 and per-
ected to the greatly increased benefit
employees in 1853, would again de-
ermine employer contributions to the
ind.