Workforce Developments

Unemployment extension signed into law!

This morning the president signed into law a bill (HR 2642) that will extend unemployment benefits for an additional thirteen weeks for long-term unemployed workers. Some relevant links:

• Analysis of key measures in HR 2642 from the Associated Press;
• Remarks at the signing from President Bush;
• Text of the bill;
• History of the bill from OpenCongress.org.

This piece of legislation is enormously important to many Americans. While I've been covering its long, strange trip through Congress since early April, the number of daily hits on this blog has increased more than eight-fold, most of them from people seeking out information about the unemployment extension. Many readers have commented on my earlier posts, telling their own personal stories. In particular, check out this post from April 16, and this post from May 19.

All my posts on the unemployment extension can be found here. For more information on the extension, visit UnemployedWorkers.org.

My thanks to everyone who commented here. Good luck to all of you in your job searches.

Unemployment extension fails one day, revived the next

Congress is still working it, even as I write.

Yesterday (June 11, 2008), the House of Representatives brought forward HR 5749, a standalone measure that would provide an emergency extension of benefits to long-term unemployed workers. 13 weeks for most states; up to 26 weeks for states with high unemployment levels, including Michigan and California.

They used a procedure that required 2/3 of the House to vote yes to pass. It failed, but not by much. 279 members voted for the extension (290 votes were needed): 49 Republicans and 230 Democrats. The plan is to bring it up for a vote again today on a procedure that only requires a simple majority. This bill has been on one wild ride since it was first proposed as part of last year's economic stimulus package.

Despite last week's surprising jump in unemployment, Bush continues to threaten to veto this important legislation. For the most recent updates on the unemployment extension, visit the UnemployedWorkers.org page from the National Employment Law Project.

This is the news as of June 12. For my most recent post on the extension, click here.

UPDATE: At about 3 p.m. their time today, June 12, the House passed the unemployment extension by a vote of 274 to 137. Now, on to the Senate.

Congress on the verge of dropping unemployment extension

If they do, it will be the second near-miss for this much-needed economic stimulus.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced yesterday that the House would probably drop from an Iraq/Afghanistan spending bill (HR 2642) the 13 week emergency extension for workers who've exhausted their unemployment benefits. This after both the House and Senate passed versions of the bill that include the extension. Bush has vowed to veto the entire bill, saying it would cost too much.

HR 2642 also includes a popular extension of the GI Bill that would expand veterans' access to education. Bush, after saying the bill costs too much, asked Congress to expand the veterans benefits further to apply to their spouses and children.

The National Employment Law Project is urging those who support the unemployment extension to contact their member of Congress and urge Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi not to drop the provision. Such extensions have been passed  five times in American history, including one extension signed into law by Bush's father.

Here's the long, strange history of the emergency unemployment benefits extension:

• Originally included as part of the HR 5140, the original stimulus package passed by Congress and signed into law in February. Missed being included by one vote. 
• Introduced as separate legislation (HR 4934 , S 2544 and  HR 5749)
• Folded into the Iraq/Afghanistan spending bill (HR 2642) by both the House and Senate 

The House is expected to take up the bill early next week.

Readers talk about the unemployment benefits extension

Over the past few weeks I've been closely following the effort in Congress to pass legislation for an emergency extension of unemployment benefits for folks who've been out of work for a long time. Currently it's attached to HR 2642. It has passed both the House and Senate but in different forms, so they'll have to meet to reconcile differences. Bush has vowed to veto the bill.

During this time, Workforce Developments readership has shot up, and I've been getting more comments than usual. Overwhelmingly, the visits are from people Googling phrases like "unemployment extension," and the comments have mostly been on those posts. In other words, this is of interest to a many, many people.

It's worth hearing from people who would be personally affected by the extension. Here's a sampling of those comments, in their own words:

Come on lets get some extended benefits going. I am a hard worker and have been laid off from full time work since July 2007. My unemployment benefits ended the first of Jan and all I have been able to find is 12 hours of work a week at $8 an hour and I did not get that until the last week of Feb. I could use some help here!!

        --Laurie

I've been unemployed since November. And I've been trying to find work for MONTHS!! Even the temp agencies are slow, and when I do work with them, I can't interview for a new position. My unemployment ran out months ago, and the debt collectors are calling at all hours. Where is my $600 going? Bills. Such a silly move on Bush's part. He is so detached...

        --Argh

Unemployment is not my way of life and I'm sure it is not the way of life for 99% of the people who are now jobless. It has been a very humble experience and I have learned that being unemployed has a horrible stigma attached. My benefits ran out two weeks ago. We have a child in college and my benefit check was covering her rent. She is not qualified for ANY grants or FASFA money due to our 2007 tax return (because our combined income was tied into my previous employment)a Home equity loan is out since our home has DECREASED in value and student loans are hard to find plus interest rates are high. We are struggling to pay bills with one income not to mention health care costs. We have done everything right in the past and now I feel like we need just alittle help along with the other thousands who just need to eat. I guess that is hard to understand when you are living in the best public housing (the White House) and receiving free lifetime health care etc...like George Bush is.

        --Kristie

I RAN OUT OF BENEFITS 4/2006 , IF THEY PASS THE EXTENSION FOR THE 26 WEEKS WILL I BE RECIEVE ANY OF THIS MONEY?

        --Ken

please pass this I've not been able to find work since July 2007

        --Larry

please vote yes.my wife and i are in our early 70s and can,t find work. our benefts have expired. THANK YOU!!!!

        --Harold

For updates on the bill, resources for unemployed workers, and to join a discussion about unemployment, visit the National Employment Law Center's UnemployedWorkers.org.

Thanks to Michele Martin at Bamboo Project blog whose 31 Day Comment Challenge inspired this post.

Senate passes unemployment extension

Yesterday the U.S. Senate passed HR 2642, the Iraq/Afghanistan spending bill that includes a provision for an emergency extension of unemployment benefits. The bill passed by the Senate also includes a provision to expand the G.I. Bill, providing free college education to service members after three years of active duty.

The vote was 75 for to 22 against, enough to override the veto President Bush has promised. Last week HR 2642 passed the House with a large majority, but not enough to override a veto.

Latest on the 2008 unemployment extension vote

Last Thursday the House of Representatives voted to extend unemployment benefits, with 256 voting for and 166 against. Now things move to the Senate.

The measure has been added as an amendment to HR 2642, a much larger bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill actually passed both the House and Senate late last year, but differences between the two versions are currently being ironed out. The unemployment extension is now one of those differences.

The National Employment Law Project is reporting a vote in the Senate on unemployment benefits could happen just before or after the Congressional Memorial Day break (May 26-30).

UPDATE: If you're looking for my most recent post on the 2008 unemployment extension, click here. More recent information also may be available at UnemployedWorkers.org.

New funding for projects to help laid-off workers

The US Department of Labor has just announced $20 million in funding for projects that build skills and employment options for workers who are currently or are at risk of becoming "dislocated." That's workforce development jargon for "laid off."

Only state workforce agencies are eligible to compete.

There are four categories of funding:

1. Entrepreneurship Opportunities for Dislocated Workers, to help people launch small businesses;
   
2. Getting Ahead of the Curve: Raising Educational/Skill Levels of Workers in Declining Industries, to upgrade skills for workers likely to be laid off;
3. Innovative Adult Learning Models for Dislocated Workers, to identify new and innovative ways to train unemployed workers; and
4. Preventing Dislocations of TANF Recipients Moving Into Entry  Level Jobs Subject to Economic Churn, to help former TANF recipients maintain  employment and enter or advance within high-growth industries

You can read the full Federal Register announcement here. Deadline to submit a proposal is June 13, 2008.

In other DOL funding news, ETA announced Wednesday it plans to give more than twice that much, $49.5 million, in grants for projects to "enhance education and career opportunities in high schools" (Federal Register announcement). Only six school districts nationwide have been invited to compete: Baltimore City, MD; Berkshire Farms, NY; New York City, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Puerto Rico; and Salem-Keizer, OR. However, faith- and community-based organizations working with those school districts are also eligible to submit proposals. 

Action update on unemployment benefits bill

Thanks to reader Kristie for bringing this to my attention:

The House of Representatives may act as early as this Wednesday, May 14, on a bill that will include extension of unemployment benefits for up to an additional 26 weeks. This was originally part of the economic stimulus package that brought you the $600 IRS check, but was eliminated during negotiations. For more details on the proposal, click here and here.

The National Employment Law Project, on their website UnemployedWorkers.org, explains some crucial details:

The President is still on record opposing the extension of jobless benefits despite the continued loss of jobs reported last month by the Department of Labor.  For the President to understand the importance of the bill, it is critically necessary that the extension of jobless benefits continues to build strong bi-partisan support.

If you want your member of Congress to hear from you on this important topic, now is the time to contact them. You can find your rep here, and NELP has some pointers on contacting them here.

Job hunter image: Ohio Department of Job and Family Services

The Governator joins the call to extend unemployment benefits

Last week California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger joined the call for Congress to pass HR 4934, which would extend unemployment (UI) benefits for people who've been out of work for more than six months. Earlier in April New York Governor David Paterson wrote to Congress urging passage of the bill.

In his letter Schwarzenneger points out

Federal funding for unemployment insurance administration has not been adjusted for inflation since 1995.  For the last three years alone, the federal funding shortfall to states is approaching $1 billion.  For fiscal year 2008, the national UI administrative funding appropriation has been reduced by an estimated $110 million.  Roughly $30 million would have come to serve unemployed workers in California.

You can read the full text of the governor's letter and press release here.

The National Employment Law Project has calculated that every dollar of unemployment benefits paid out boosts the economy by $2.15.

For more on unemployment insurance and the emergency extension, click here.

Unemployment lines image source

It's time to extend unemployment benefits

When Congress passed the recent economic stimulus package that has the IRS preparing $600 checks for most working Americans, another provision in the bill was struck down, by a single vote. That would have extended unemployment (UI) benefits to hundreds of thousands of long-term unemployed workers.

Congress is stepping up pressure to pass a separate bill that would enact the extension, HR 4934 (text here, or summary here). The bill would also fund summer jobs programs for youth, and investments in infrastructure construction projects that would create new jobs, a concept I've written about a lot on this blog.

Under current law (click here for a history of UI), unemployment benefits run out after 26 weeks (6 months). The National Employment Law Project estimates more than 3 million Americans will exhaust their benefits this year. They will be left with no income, and no government support when that occurs. Congress has enacted UI extensions five times, including one G.H.W. Bush signed into law, so this neither unprecedented nor unfamiliar. Newspapers have editorialized in favor of the extension, and even some Republicans are jumping on the bandwagon. Bush rejected the idea again on Monday.

New York Governor David Paterson wrote to his Congressional representatives last week (full letter here) urging passage of the unemployment benefits extension, saying

As you are aware, an extension of UI benefits during a downturn is a particularly effective economic stimulus because the benefits are both well-targeted — to areas and industries most affected by economic slowdowns — and are temporary. It puts money into the hands of workers and families who need assistance the most and are most likely to spend it immediately on basic essentials. Further, the money invested in extended benefits flows immediately to local businesses, which in turn provides an additional economic boost.

Why this provision was cut from the original stimulus package in the first place is a mystery. Six hundred bucks a person is chump change compared to the scope of the growing recession. Let's push Congress to get it right this time.

Image source: Social Security Administration

.

Update Apr 17: Welcome to readers arriving from OpenCongress.org. If this is your first time on the Workforce Developments blog, click over to my page for first-time visitors.

Japanese companies close U.S. plants, move back home

Is it a trend, or just a fluke? Last week two Japanese companies announced plans to shut down U.S. manufacturing facilities and move them back to Japan. Mitsubushi Kagaku will close a Virginia unit that makes organic photoconductors for copiers and laser printers. Honda will close an Ohio motorcycle plant.

Mitsubishi expects to lay off 80 people. Honda expects to move all its employees to other production facilities.

Mitsubishi will move its production to Japan and Singapore, because a growing share of its supplier and customer base is in Asia. Honda says it plans to consolidate the work from both the Ohio plant and one in Japan at a new Japanese facility, where they will make larger motorcycles. Moving production back to Japan may seem counter-intuitive, since labor there is meant to be more expensive than in the U.S. There must be other cost advantages to moving back home.

As the U.S. economy contracts and economies in China, India and elsewhere expand, will we see more foreign-owned companies moving production closer to their customers? How will this play out for American workers? Already last week the Department of Labor reported an uptick of 19,000 new claims for unemployment over the previous week.

Jobs, the economy and the arts

Last week I went to see an exhibit of posters from the Works Progress Administration (WPA), at Forest Lawn Cemetery (only in L.A.). The posters dated from 1935 to 1943, and covered a wide range of topics. There were ads for art exhibits and theater events of the day; promotions of American regional cultures, histories and economies; exhortations to work together for the common good; and World War II-era images encouraging people to help out in the war effort.

The WPA is one of those visionary government programs that almost seems unimaginable today. During the Depression of the 1930s, when some 30% of Americans were unemployed, President Franklin Roosevelt put them back to work as part of the New Deal. Highways and bridges were built, libraries were created and staffed, rural regions were developed. The WPA also included a Federal Art Project that was designed to employ out-of-work artists. They both created art and taught their skills to others. They designed covers for books by writers in the Federal Writers Project, also part of the New Deal.

Roosevelt knew that artists could play a valuable role in bringing the country together to rebuild after the economic and social devastation of the Depression.

I've said on this blog before, that it's time today for a new New Deal. Where Roosevelt's New Deal focused on physical infrastructure - which certainly needs serious investment today - a 21st century New Deal would also focus on rebuilding the crumbling service sector of our economy, especially in education and health care. The ripple effects of the mortgage meltdown only make this New Deal even more urgent than before.

After seeing this exhibit, I'll add the arts to my New Deal proposal. These posters show how writers, painters, sculptors and actors can help bring our divided country together around putting people to work and strengthening our economy.

Job search goes web 2.0

My colleague Michele Martin over at the Bamboo Project blog does a terrific job of writing about how ordinary mortals like you and me can use technology to make our lives easier and do our jobs better. She's one of only a handful of us out there in the workforce development world who are blogging. She also has a really lovely image of bamboo and stones on her blog banner.

Michele is starting a series this week where she's walking a mid-career training professional named Shari through the process of figuring out what kinds of interactive online (web 2.0) tools she can use to help in her job search. I've read the first post, and I plan to continue reading it through the week. Topics she'll cover include

• Setting up A Job Search Dashboard
• Tools for Organizing Your Job Search
• Setting up an Online Portfolio
• Developing Your Personal Brand
• Tools to Support Branding

Although it sounds like the series will be focused on more educated professional workers, I'm sure a lot of the tools she talks about can be used by other job seekers too. Perhaps Michele will address that a bit in this series.

If this sounds interesting to you, click on over. Should be good reading.

Spotlighting poverty in the presidential campaign

Here's a new website you'll want to check out and keep updated on: Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity.

Created by the Annie E. Casey and Eos Foundations, Spotlight on Poverty is working to "build momentum for national action addressing poverty in 2009." They've begun by asking the 2008 presidential candidates to answer five questions related to poverty and economic opportunity. They include "Would your Administration set a specific numerical target and timeline for reducing poverty?"

Imagine that!

The candidates have been invited to submit written or videotaped answers, and all responses will be posted on their site. I'm delighted to see foundations pushing for greater debate on poverty in America, and I'll be watching closely to see what the candidates have to say.

How much does it cost to help someone get a good job?

Back in September I reported from the Cal Workforce Association's Monterey Mind Meld about a study that seeks to break out One-Stop costs on a per activity basis. That is, rather than a traditional line item budget reporting how much the One-Stop spent on office supplies, staff, rent and so on, they used what's known as Activity-Based Cost accounting (ABC) to answer questions like

Q: What share of the budget do partners contribute to the One-Stop?
A: Average is 34%, with a range from 5% to 80%

Q: How much does it cost to provide case management to clients?
A: Median cost for each client receiving case management is $1,208, with a range from $218 to $4,543

The full report - the California One-Stop System Cost Study Report - has finally been issued and is available online at the California Workforce Investment Board page.

Researchers Richard W. Moore, Philip C. Gorman and Andrew Wilson (all of Cal State Northridge's Dept. of Management) looked at a sample of One-Stops throughout California, taking care to include those located urban, suburban and rural locations. Alongside the findings, they clearly explain how the ABC accounting method works, how they implemented it, and the strengths and weaknesses of this approach. This study is the first of its kind nationally, and begins to provide benchmarks for comparing the cost of providing certain services from one One-Stop to the next.

The danger of a study like this, in our cut-spending-to-the-bone era, is the temptation to focus on the most expensive services. We know that job seekers with greater needs will cost more to serve. We also know cost of living can drive up expenses in urban areas, while the dearth of job opportunities, limited transportation and other services, can drive up expenses in rural areas. I'd hate to see someone use their findings as an excuse to cut services to those with the greatest needs. We have too many of those kinds of negative incentives in the system already.

The next step in a study like this is to link long-term outcomes to spending. Does spending more lead to better outcomes for those with the greatest needs? Does it lead to better-paying jobs with better benefits? Does it lead to longer retention on the job? That study would have to account for employment trends in the local region and industry.

What's great about this study is once we know what works and what that costs, then we can use that info to make the case for increasing government and philanthropic investment in workforce development. We can also use it to build political will that make those investments possible.

Who does the state workforce agency send its WARN notices to?

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal is reporting 23 staff at the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development are scheduled to lose their jobs by the end of this week, due to federal budget cuts. Eighteen of them work in local Job Service Centers around the state, and the rest  are in support positions.

This item caught my eye not because I was shocked to see these staff being laid off. It's a familiar enough scene. In fact, I'd like to see figures from other states of how many people paid by federal workforce development funds have been laid off in recent years. No, the surprise is that reporter Steven Walters thought it was important enough to post the info on the newspaper's All Politics Watch blog.

As Wisconsin DWD official Jessica Erickson told Walters:

It's unfortunate the federal government has not made this funding a top priority. This is the only option we have.

Understanding DOL's monthly jobs report

Each month the Bureau of Labor Stats at the Department of Labor issues its Employment Report, including the latest official stats on unemployment, job growth (or loss), payroll and earnings. And, of course, they revise figures from their previous releases.

Making sense of what this data means in the real world isn't always easy. You can check out the White House spin, or you can read the business media to find out how Wall Street reacted.

One good source of analysis is the monthly Jobs Byte from the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Dean Baker and Heather Boushey take turns analyzing the Employment Report and publishing a same-day briefing on the CEPR site. You can subscribe and get it sent to your inbox. CEPR offers Data Bytes on other government data, including prices, gross domestic product, and some less-regular reports.

What's their bottom-line analysis of last Friday's report? 

The net picture in this report is fairly ambiguous. The job growth reported for September is largely in line with expectations, but the upward revisions for the prior two months indicate that the labor market has been somewhat stronger than previously believed. Still, there is considerable basis for concern about this pattern of growth. Manufacturing employment may stabilize in the months ahead, but construction employment will almost certainly continue downward. It is unlikely that the job growth in health care and restaurants will be sufficient to keep the labor market strong.

When military spouses qualify for dislocated worker funding

DOL's Employment and Training Administration has just released updated policy guidance clarifying when the spouse of a member of the armed forces can qualify for federally-funded dislocated worker services. The guidance letter update states

...it would be reasonable for states and local areas to conclude that in the vast majority of cases, military spouses impacted by a service member's duty reassignment or discharge will meet the "unlikely to return to a previous industry or occupation" criterion.

State and local workforce system leaders are strongly encouraged to reexamine their WIA Dislocated Worker program eligibility policies in light of this clarification and to take full advantage of the flexibility provided provided under the dislocated worker definition to engage and serve military spouses in need of education, training, and career assistance.

The flexibility is great, and military spouses certainly need these services. But who will dislocated worker programs cut out in order to serve this population? Will next year's federal budget add new funds to meet this new need?

To read the full document, click Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 22-04 Change 1. The original TEGL 22-04 is available here.

Workforce development is good for America's health

Earlier this year the journal Psychosomatic Medicine published a study that found unemployment reduces immune system function, making a person more susceptible to illness. What's more important, they found that after an unemployed person gets a job the immune system quickly recovers.

In other words, workforce development is good for our health, too.

It's something to think about in the midst of presidential debates over how to fix our failing health care system, and the health care trust fund being created by the United Auto Workers and General Motors. The end of long-term employment commitments has put workers at ever greater economic risk - but has it also made us unhealthier? Perhaps it's not just lack of health insurance coverage but also layoffs that strain our nation's health care system. Could employers improve people's health by, well, employing them? By making longer-term commitments to employees?

Workforce development is more important than most Americans know. We don't just help people get jobs. While helping businesses thrive and the economy buzz, we also help people stay healthy.

Countrywide: hiring or firing?

On the same day that Countrywide finally admitted it had just laid off 500 employees - nearly all from its not-quite-prime-time Full Spectrum Lending division - the company sent around an email to customers that included this little gem:

Countrywide is growing
At Countrywide, we're doing more than helping people build equity in their homes. We're empowering great talent to grow in their careers. If you or someone you know is a mortgage or real estate finance professional ready for greater challenges and returns, visit countrywidecareers.com for a wide array of rewarding opportunities.

Countrywide is hiring?

Curious to know what kind of opportunities are on offer, I followed the link and found 6,916 jobs listed. Among other things, they're looking for a 1st VP for Management Reporting in California, Account Executives in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Texas, underwriters in Virginia, Texas, Kentucky and Arizona, and nearly 420 openings across the country for something called a "Team HLC." Looks to be an entry level loan originator, since the position only requires a high school diploma or equivalent, and a year or two of experience.

Should we take it financial services is still a high growth industry after all? Or should we wonder if these jobs are really going to be filled?