Updated: Pegulas and arena/hospitality workers

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

That’s not quite how it works.

I think @Eleven is implying that termination - while it seems harsh - may place the workers in a better position with NYS DOL’s unemployment division.

And in that regard, NYS DOL invoices employers for the UI benefits paid out.

You and Eleven should stop ruining the narrative with accuracy. 

[Eleven]

13 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

That’s not quite how it works.

I think @Eleven is implying that termination - while it seems harsh - may place the workers in a better position with NYS DOL’s unemployment division.

And in that regard, NYS DOL invoices employers for the UI benefits paid out.

Yes that is what I’m getting at.  And PSE’s UI rate will rise as a result

[That Aud Smell]

6 minutes ago, Hank said:

You and Eleven should stop ruining the narrative with accuracy. 

Ha. I’d still have rather seen PSE float those folks with some sort of stipends. 

Just now, Eleven said:

Yes that is what I’m getting at.  And PSE’s UI rate will rise as a result

Fo sho.

[Ogre]

36 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

And in that regard, NYS DOL invoices employers for the UI benefits paid out

I have always thought that this is how employer contributions worked.  https://bizfluent.com/info-8091765-pays-unemployment-new-york-state.html We have had contractors in the past try to fire workers when the job was done instead of a layoff because they claimed it saved them from paying the tax. Does the state only collect the tax after the employee has filed for benefits? That's the part about invoicing that I don't get.

40 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I think @Eleven is implying that termination - while it seems harsh - may place the workers in a better position with NYS DOL’s unemployment division.

I don't understand how being fired puts them in a better position with DOL. If our workers are fired or quit, they are not eligible for benefits. Only if the contractor lays them off. Teach me how this system works. I NEED to know.

[Ogre]

58 minutes ago, Hank said:

You and Eleven should stop ruining the narrative with accuracy. 

Perhaps you'd like to explain it to me? What does contractor XYZ need to do when the six week project, that he hired me out of the Hall for, is over with and he lays me off and I open an unemployment claim with him being listed as the last employer? How about contractor ABC who was the prior contractor worked for as well as contractor 123 and 456, all worked for and listed as employers for that calendar year? I'd really like to know how the contractor meets his requirements under the law because I work out of a hiring hall and work for multiple employers in any calendar year, so I usually have an unemployment claim open to claim on the weeks here or there that no contractors are looking for workers...….Explain.....I'm openly and freely confessing that I don't know. 

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, Ogre said:

I have always thought that this is how employer contributions worked.  https://bizfluent.com/info-8091765-pays-unemployment-new-york-state.html We have had contractors in the past try to fire workers when the job was done instead of a layoff because they claimed it saved them from paying the tax. Does the state only collect the tax after the employee has filed for benefits? That's the part about invoicing that I don't get.

I don't understand how being fired puts them in a better position with DOL. If our workers are fired or quit, they are not eligible for benefits. Only if the contractor lays them off. Teach me how this system works. I NEED to know.

 

1 hour ago, Ogre said:

Perhaps you'd like to explain it to me? What does contractor XYZ need to do when the six week project, that he hired me out of the Hall for, is over with and he lays me off and I open an unemployment claim with him being listed as the last employer? How about contractor ABC who was the prior contractor worked for as well as contractor 123 and 456, all worked for and listed as employers for that calendar year? I'd really like to know how the contractor meets his requirements under the law because I work out of a hiring hall and work for multiple employers in any calendar year, so I usually have an unemployment claim open to claim on the weeks here or there that no contractors are looking for workers...….Explain.....I'm openly and freely confessing that I don't know. 

I don't know everything about this issue, but I do know that in New York state, UI premiums rise according to UI claims by former employees.  And mass layoffs really hurt the employer.  So PSE is taking a hit here with respect to its year-round hospitality employees.  And they can't simply reincorporate as some sort of successor entity to try to save on the premium increase.  I've seen employers try that one.  Doesn't work.  The state catches them.

The other thing I suspect--but I'm basing this on knowledge that is 20 years old at this point--is that union jobs, and especially union jobs that are on a per-project basis, work very differently.   I think even non-union per-project jobs work differently, because otherwise it would be unfairly punitive to employers that only need workers for a certain amount of time, such as the time it takes to erect a building.  I don't know what the obligations of a GC or sub are in that regard.  

Edited March 21, 2020 by Eleven

[Ogre]

15 minutes ago, Eleven said:

 

I don't know everything about this issue, but I do know that in New York state, UI premiums rise according to UI claims by former employees.  And mass layoffs really hurt the employer.  So PSE is taking a hit here with respect to its year-round hospitality employees.  And they can't simply reincorporate as some sort of successor entity to try to save on the premium increase.  I've seen employers try that one.  Doesn't work.  The state catches them.

The other thing I suspect--but I'm basing this on knowledge that is 20 years old at this point--is that union jobs, and especially union jobs that are on a per-project basis, work very differently.   I think even non-union per-project jobs work differently, because otherwise it would be unfairly punitive to employers that only need workers for a certain amount of time, such as the time it takes to erect a building.  I don't know what the obligations of a GC or sub are in that regard.  

This is exactly how the contractors explain it to me. It makes sense to me why they’d fire an employee rather than lay them off from a $ perspective (they still wrong and they ain’t gittin away with it). I guess my real question is then, how is termination defined? If Terry tells them they were all fired then they’d still be eligible by DOL’s standards (they lost employment through no fault of their own) to claim for UI benefits and Terry would still be on the hook for the increase in premiums. Or would he not since his claim is they were fired? If you don’t have time or interest that’s perfectly understandable. I’m just trying to fully understand both for my own personal use in the field and to be able to know with certainty what it is that I think Terry is trying to do. In fairness I guess. 
 

Also, open question to anyone that knows, how are companies forced into this system? I know of a business in operation that panicked due to laying off people because they didn’t “have the insurance”. Is their fear justified? They are not-for-profit and employ a good number of people. They definitely meet the standard from that link I posted.

Also, thanks for your response @Eleven. You’re a good dude.

[Eleven]

35 minutes ago, Ogre said:

This is exactly how the contractors explain it to me. It makes sense to me why they’d fire an employee rather than lay them off from a $ perspective (they still wrong and they ain’t gittin away with it). I guess my real question is then, how is termination defined? If Terry tells them they were all fired then they’d still be eligible by DOL’s standards (they lost employment through no fault of their own) to claim for UI benefits and Terry would still be on the hook for the increase in premiums. Or would he not since his claim is they were fired? If you don’t have time or interest that’s perfectly understandable. I’m just trying to fully understand both for my own personal use in the field and to be able to know with certainty what it is that I think Terry is trying to do. In fairness I guess. 
 

Also, open question to anyone that knows, how are companies forced into this system? I know of a business in operation that panicked due to laying off people because they didn’t “have the insurance”. Is their fear justified? They are not-for-profit and employ a good number of people. They definitely meet the standard from that link I posted.

Also, thanks for your response @Eleven. You’re a good dude.

Aww shucks.

Termination for cause usually means no unemployment compensation.  On the very few occasions I've had to terminate an employee for cause (think things like gross insubordination or drinking on the job), I've bargained a severance package (a week's salary per year of employment, up to a limit, is usually where I try to land), plus a promise not to contest their unemployment claim, in return for their waiver of any BS discrimination claim they might try to bring.  It's expensive, but not as expensive as defending a BS discrimination claim.

Termination for other reasons--the company shuts down, the project is over, there are layoffs, whatever, triggers the employee's right to unemployment compensation in NYS.  PSE didn't terminate for cause, it terminated because there is no present need for employees.  So these employees will get unemployment compensation and PSE will pay considerably higher premiums next year.  This isn't even close to as evil as The Athletic made it out to be.  

Companies are "forced" into this system by state law.  It is one of the reasons why some businesses prefer to operate elsewhere; we tend to take care of people better in NYS than some other states do.  It seems (not that I have the details) that the not-for-profit that you mention was not following the law.  In the words of George Sr.^, they "may have committed some *light* treason." 

 

 

^EDIT:  That's George Bluth from Arrested Development and not George H.W. Bush.

Edited March 21, 2020 by Eleven

[Weave]

My understanding is, if those employees were given a temporary layoff they still would have qualified for UI, PSE still would have been subjected to an increase in their UI premiums, but those employees would have been eligible to come back once things returned to normalcy.  I'm not understanding the need, nor the benefit to the employee, of a termination.

[Stoner]

Here's why I keep saying their PR is ham-handed. If, and it's a big if, the move they made to terminate was actually in the best interest of the employees as the Pegulas' defenders here are saying, that should have been clearly communicated to the workers and the community. When the Yacht Crosby finally finds port, I look forward to Terry stepping up the microphone on a grainy flip phone video and explaining it all. "Starting today..."

[Ogre]

35 minutes ago, Weave said:

My understanding is, if those employees were given a temporary layoff they still would have qualified for UI, PSE still would have been subjected to an increase in their UI premiums, but those employees would have been eligible to come back once things returned to normalcy.  I'm not understanding the need, nor the benefit to the employee, of a termination.

I'm still in this boat. I file a claim every year and the only difference for my claim is that, being someone who works out of a hiring hall, I'm not require to do the daily job search stuff. I have employment in my trade coming soon. The only benefit of not having been layed off that could exist(and that I could possibly wrap my mind around) would be something to do with the job search process. I don't take part in that so I really couldn't say. Benefit is rate is calculated by the highest of the last five quarters so I don't see any boost there. I get that his premiums will rise either way. The more I think about this the more it seems like a way to cut down their wages. If you lay them off then they come back at the same wage. If you terminate them and make them crawl back after starving for awhile, you'll get them a lot cheaper. I hope for those folks sake that I'm wrong.

[Ogre]

4 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Ha. I’d still have rather seen PSE float those folks with some sort of stipends.

I still don't think that would have affected those people's UI claims. If anything that would have helped them until they could be told officially that they were terminated. It could have even been beneficial for their benefit rate. NYS UI also is not retroactive. That week that were in limbo won't count toward their claim. Their claim starts the week that they filed the claim unless the state is making an exception for Covid related unemployment(which they'd need to do to keep those deemed essential like Ironworkers from using that benefit when they file a claim for their ordinary slow down). I'd love to see a statement from the org as to why they terminated vs layed off. If there is a benefit there, I'd love to be enlightened.

[Eleven]

4 hours ago, Weave said:

My understanding is, if those employees were given a temporary layoff they still would have qualified for UI, PSE still would have been subjected to an increase in their UI premiums, but those employees would have been eligible to come back once things returned to normalcy.  I'm not understanding the need, nor the benefit to the employee, of a termination.

Events like this might make the employer rethink.  716 for example is busy on game nights but emoty otherwise.  I will try to offer more detail when i Mnit stuck on mobile, hopefully tomorrow or Monday

[Neo]

13 hours ago, Eleven said:

Events like this might make the employer rethink.  716 for example is busy on game nights but emoty otherwise.  I will try to offer more detail when i Mnit stuck on mobile, hopefully tomorrow or Monday

I love this post.  Mobile quirks and “emoty” employees.  “Emoty” is a state of being we try to instill in employees!

[LGR4GM]

On 3/21/2020 at 9:24 PM, Eleven said:

Events like this might make the employer rethink.  716 for example is busy on game nights but emoty otherwise.  I will try to offer more detail when i Mnit stuck on mobile, hopefully tomorrow or Monday

Maybe they should have better food and less overpriced beer.

[Eleven]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Maybe they should have better food and less overpriced beer.

I don't know whether the beer is overpriced, but their food is horrible.  Like worse than Chef's and Pearl Street's unholy love child horrible.  The only worse food in Buffalo might be across the tunnel in the Arena itself.

On 3/22/2020 at 10:33 AM, Neo said:

I love this post.  Mobile quirks and “emoty” employees.  “Emoty” is a state of being we try to instill in employees!

I have thick fingers.  I think PA calls the condition "ham hands."  I loathe typing on a phone or even on an iPad. I miss my Blackberry.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Eleven

[darksabre]

716 is weird. I've definitely had good food there. But I've also had some real mediocre food too. They must struggle to keep their good kitchen staff, which doesn't surprise me. 

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, darksabre said:

716 is weird. I've definitely had good food there. But I've also had some real mediocre food too. They must struggle to keep their good kitchen staff, which doesn't surprise me. 

They must lose their love of cooking.

[Eleven]

2 hours ago, darksabre said:

I've definitely had good food there

From where did you bring it in?

[Thorner]

On 3/18/2020 at 7:28 PM, Eleven said:

1.  Why not?  Other franchises are taking their time.  They will take care of it.

2.  Why is it different?  Because they have employees (players) who make millions?  It isn't different. Your local bar isn't paying bartenders  Your local restaurant isn't paying servers.  I don't hate that; that's a small business.  But Wegmans is huge and has cut hours, and those cashiers and deli workers and produce stockers suffer the same way. So does every cashier at Tops.  So does every guy who cleans a room at a Hilton-owned hotel.  So does every person who works at a movie theatre or a bowling alley. I don't really see why the Pegulas are the enemy, other than that you and PA want to make them one.  

Where's your PROPERLY directed outrage?

This is so much BS, and I know you, and I know you know better.

Sabres and Bruins the only 2 tone-deaf NHL organizations not paying their employees NOW while they need it. 

On 3/21/2020 at 12:09 PM, That Aud Smell said:

That’s not quite how it works.

I think @Eleven is implying that termination - while it seems harsh - may place the workers in a better position with NYS DOL’s unemployment division.

And in that regard, NYS DOL invoices employers for the UI benefits paid out.

The other thing that puts them in a really good position is not having a guaranteed job after this and having to re-apply. 

Edited March 24, 2020 by Thorny

[sabremike]

Since someone mentioned Wegmans it should be noted that the company announced that all hourly associates are getting a raise of $2 per hour until this situation is concluded.

[Stoner]

4 hours ago, sabremike said:

Since someone mentioned Wegmans it should be noted that the company announced that all hourly associates are getting a raise of $2 per hour until this situation is concluded.

Awesome. I chuckled inwardly and somewhat cynically about one of the words that have emerged during this crisis: "essential." Essential workers, essential businesses, essential services. Has anyone noticed how the more essential you are to society when the ***** hits the fan, the less you make?

[Zamboni]

5 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Awesome. I chuckled inwardly and somewhat cynically about one of the words that have emerged during this crisis: "essential." Essential workers, essential businesses, essential services. Has anyone noticed how the more essential you are to society when the ***** hits the fan, the less you make?

Doctors, nurses, police, most politicians, most medical staff with a good degree, say hello. 

i think it’s a mix. It’s not all one way or all another way. I see minimum wage earners to millionaires as still essential workers during this pandemic ?‍♂️ 

[Stoner]

3 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Doctors, nurses, police, most politicians, most medical staff with a good degree, say hello. 

i think it’s a mix. It’s not all one way or all another way. I see minimum wage earners to millionaires as still essential workers during this pandemic ?‍♂️ 

Fair point. But in general I think my point is valid. For what they are being asked to do, do you think the average healthcare worker makes enough? It was probably more of a comment on the famous CEO to rank and file disparity.

[darksabre]

The "essential" tag to me is more interesting as far as how it shows just how many of us do work that we don't actually need to commute to. A lot of businesses are running normal operations with no one in a central office. Technology has come so far that in many cases "the office" is now obsolete.

Think about how much less we would pollute, how much less energy, how much less real estate we would use if we simply...continued this work from home practice?

Though I do think there is value to having workers socially interact in real life spaces together, it's probably something we could get away from doing all the time. All of this brick and mortar office infrastructure suddenly seems...superfluous.