# Nursing Home Employees Choose Unemployment Checks Over Paychecks



## Robert59 (Jun 22, 2020)

Despite the ongoing pandemic, which has hit understaffed nursing homes particularly hard, many caregivers have chosen unemployment checks over paychecks.

According to reports, a nurse in New England said she had to stop working two months ago in order to take care of her children. However, she is now getting paid an extra $600 per week in unemployment benefits.

https://www.oann.com/nursing-home-employees-choose-unemployment-checks-over-paychecks/


----------



## win231 (Jun 22, 2020)

No surprise.  Nursing homes are one of those businesses that operate on the cheap - often at the expense of employees' safety.  And it's a difficult job, even under the best circumstances.
Case in point:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/hea...e-to-reuters/ar-BB15PgGq?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 22, 2020)

Robert59 said:


> Despite the ongoing pandemic, which has hit understaffed nursing homes particularly hard, many caregivers have chosen unemployment checks over paychecks.
> 
> According to reports, a nurse in New England said she had to stop working two months ago in order to take care of her children. However, she is now getting paid an extra $600 per week in unemployment benefits.
> 
> https://www.oann.com/nursing-home-employees-choose-unemployment-checks-over-paychecks/



I suspect she'll want to go back to work in July when the extra $600 stops flowing.


----------



## win231 (Jun 22, 2020)

People who criticize nurses for doing this would do the same thing in that situation.
That "Holier Than Thou" thing is really popular.


----------



## 911 (Jun 22, 2020)

I think that whoever decided to add the $600 to unemployment really didn’t put a lot of thought about the loopholes and the cracks that existed in the system. I think maybe $600 doesn’t sound like a lot of money to some of us, but to others, it’s a week’s or more more pay.


----------



## PopsnTuff (Jun 22, 2020)

Thot an employee had to be layed off or fired to collect....how does one collect after they quit? Am I behind the times or missing something here? The second link shows the nurse being fired but not the first.


----------



## JaniceM (Jun 22, 2020)

PopsnTuff said:


> Thot an employee had to be layed off or fired to collect....how does one collect after they quit? Am I behind the times or missing something here? The second link shows the nurse being fired but not the first.


That's a good question-  long ago, a family member had to quit a job due to relocating, and wasn't eligible for unemployment.  I kinda figured that was the rule.


----------



## 911 (Jun 22, 2020)

Don’t take my word for it, but I thought there was a loophole that if the adult had to stay home to take care of their kids because schools were closed and they could not find affordable childcare, they could collect unemployment in some states.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 22, 2020)

I think there are going to be some unhappy people when they have to pay back that extra money. Reading up, I found that in order to be eligible for the extra $600, workers must be unable to do their job as a direct result of the virus outbreak — like having a sick family member; or the inability to commute because of the quarantine. 
911, you may be correct. I had forgotten that schools are still closed. No matter though because, the program end July 31st.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 22, 2020)

JaniceM said:


> That's a good question-  long ago, a family member had to quit a job due to relocating, and wasn't eligible for unemployment.  I kinda figured that was the rule.



I believe that still holds true today. Generally, if you reject an employer’s call to return to work, then you have quit your job. And if you quit your job, you are no longer eligible for unemployment compensation.


----------



## AnnieA (Jun 22, 2020)

Thank goodness the two private ones I do consulting work for haven't experienced much of this.  We had one excellent nurse go back into retirement due to being in her mid 60s with Type II diabetes.  She was working because she loved the work and I hope she'll come out of retirement a second time once the pandemic ends.    Since the facilities are private and very well run, the jobs are prized and people know if they leave administration will have no trouble replacing them.


----------



## win231 (Jun 22, 2020)

PopsnTuff said:


> Thot an employee had to be layed off or fired to collect....how does one collect after they quit? Am I behind the times or missing something here? The second link shows the nurse being fired but not the first.


If there are working conditions that are unsafe & they are documented, employees can collect when they quit.


----------



## win231 (Jun 22, 2020)

squatting dog said:


> I believe that still holds true today. Generally, if you reject an employer’s call to return to work, then you have quit your job. And if you quit your job, you are no longer eligible for unemployment compensation.


Not always.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 22, 2020)

Around our area, it seems that nearly every store has a sign in the door/window saying they are "hiring".  But then, most of those jobs are probably "minimum wage" and if a person can make more from the government, I doubt there would be much incentive to take some of these jobs.  Perhaps when/if these unemployment "benefits" are reduced, we will see a decline in unemployment.


----------



## MarciKS (Jun 22, 2020)

PopsnTuff said:


> Thot an employee had to be layed off or fired to collect....how does one collect after they quit? Am I behind the times or missing something here? The second link shows the nurse being fired but not the first.


I think it has to do with this whole COVID thing. The rules got changed in order to allow people who had no choice but to quit their jobs to take care of their families during lockdown. Otherwise they wouldn't normally get it unless they were laid off.


----------



## StarSong (Jun 23, 2020)

squatting dog said:


> I think there are going to be some unhappy people when they have to pay back that extra money. *Reading up, I found that in order to be eligible for the extra $600, workers must be unable to do their job as a direct result of the virus outbreak — like having a sick family member; or the inability to commute because of the quarantine.*


I believe you read something that was misleading or incorrect.  The below is what I've heard throughout.  I know a number of young people who  were laid off and are collecting regular benefits plus the $600 weekly bump.  They have no dependents at all - never mind sick ones, and are able to commute.

This is from https://www.debevoise.com/insights/...pt-labor-issues-guidance-for-600-unemployment


----------



## garyt1957 (Jun 23, 2020)

911 said:


> I think that whoever decided to add the $600 to unemployment really didn’t put a lot of thought about the loopholes and the cracks that existed in the system. I think maybe $600 doesn’t sound like a lot of money to some of us, but to others, it’s a week’s or more more pay.


  One of the new stimulus options they're considering are paying people to go back to work. While well meaning, who couldn't see the problems with the extra $600 for the unemployed?


----------



## garyt1957 (Jun 23, 2020)

StarSong said:


> I believe you read something that was misleading or incorrect.  The below is what I've heard throughout.  I know a number of young people who  were laid off and are collecting regular benefits plus the $600 weekly bump.  They have no dependents at all - never mind sick ones, and are able to commute.
> 
> This is from https://www.debevoise.com/insights/...pt-labor-issues-guidance-for-600-unemployment
> View attachment 110743


Yep, I know a couple teens who were working part time making $150 or so a week and are getting the $600.


----------

