rsr for your information Ben is not a kiwi but a blue blood Aussi. You can tell by de flags.....Australia has the Southern Cross plus the Federation Star under the Jack, the points being one for each state. The EnZed flag has the Southern Cross but in red and obviously no federation star.
To be called one when you are the other is like calling a Canadian an American, a deep and subtle insult but usually just a mistake. Again just a cultural difference which you were quite correct in pointing out.
The Dole as it is called in Australia is unemployment benefits and like charity is often cold and heartless.....lol
Have you been paid unemployment benefits (dole)
Discussion in 'Polls Forum' started by Ben W, Mar 13, 2005.
Page 2 of 2
-
Yes I am certainley not a Kiwi! Aussie Aussie Aussie!
-
There is nothing wrong with receiving unemployment. It is not charity.
Fortunately, I never lost a job, etc. so I have never drawn unemployment. No one in my family was ever eligible. -
This particular thread has reminded me how significant cultural and language differences can be--even when the various ones "colliding" are quite similar. When this thread was first started, I actually got my feelings hurt, because in my area being "on the dole" has a very negative connotation--one that I've never seen associated with unemployment compensation! I'm glad I didn't post until after others' posts clarified the meaning behind associating the two terms.
I have drawn unemployment on a small number of occasions in my twenty-plus years of employment--and I can tell you that I needed those little "bonus checks" very much at the time. However, ALL those times of drawing unemployment were with the blessing of my employer who had laid me off temporarily during downtimes. In fact, my employer actually filled out the paperwork for ALL laid off employees and helped us to submit it so that we could receive benefits. The way my employer looks at this is: we paid for the benefit for our employees--in the event that a legitimate reason to draw the benefit occurs (i.e., a layoff), we WANT our employees to receive that benefit. They have also FOUGHT a benefit payment appeal for an employee who QUIT because he wanted to drink--and refused the HELP the company offered him to break his habit. I work for a wonderful group of CHRISTIAN businessmen who act out their faith daily ON the job.
With that said, I should point out this: I would imagine that ALL employers figure in the costs of unemployment when they set employee salaries--so that amount, although you'll never see it on your paycheck stub, is actually PART of your salary--along the lines of insurance benefits, etc. I know--as administrative support staff (you know, the "politically-correct" way of saying "SECRETARY"! ) that MY employer pays less to the employee in the way of an actual salary because of those payroll taxes, insurance benefits (that THEY pay for), and unemployment taxes. SO, an employer--especially a large corporation--completely covers ALL their employee-related costs by how much they offer in the way of an actual salary.
AND, with that information in mind, I don't think anyone should feel "guilty" or as if they are receiving "charity" if they have to use those benefits for legitimate reasons. I realize now that the original poster did not mean it that way, but with some of the followup posts I've read, I guess I just wanted to point that fact out. Although you as the employee did not TECHNICALLY pay those unemployment payments, the employer DID figure that into the "cost" of hiring and paying you. So, unless you ARE just being a lazy bum and not working when there are jobs out there for you, there should be no stigma to receiving those benefits.
Just my two-(and a half, since I'm so long-winded!!) cents worth. -
Congressional Pensions -
"rsr for your information Ben is not a kiwi but a blue blood Aussi."
I knew better ... but the brain slipped out of gear. My apologies. I certainly wouldn't want to be called a Texan.
-
Mea maxima culpa
-
I received unemployment benefits for about two months back in 2000.
I was working at a Georgia-Pacific plant in a nearby town. Small place, 85 employees. Specialty packaging, corrugated board, boxes, and the like. Corporate came in the day before Good Friday and told everyone, "It's been a nice run, but it is over. The following needs to to report to the alternate meeting area..." Those of us who were sent to the a;ternate meeting area were given two weeks severence pay, and three months of insurance. The other group were offered jobs at the G-P plant here. -
Also, I think there is merit in the employer-paid system. It theoretically makes the employer think before easily laying off workers. The employer pays based on a formula that includes how often his employees have drawn on it.
Karen
Page 2 of 2