I know I have been writing quite a bit about this lately but after having a few more interesting conversations in the past few days, I have decided that I am now firmly in favour of completely overhauling the EI program. We should go back to an unemployment insurance scheme that is only used for persons who have lost their job and are robustly looking for a new one. In my recommended system, unemployment insurance officers are aggressively helping people find jobs.
Hi David. I’m a recent university graduate living in PEI. Two months ago, I was looking for a government job, for I had specialized in public policy. However, I found many postings for remote jobs (ex: electronic assistants, customer service, and various administrative roles) with attractive descriptions and competitive pay. Increasingly, I have more friends working remotely for companies outside Atlantic Canada, instead of working locally. It seems as though these jobs appeal to those looking to transition from minimum wage to office administration jobs. Do you have any insights of how this pattern negatively affects the local job market, and how it might progress?
The current flat rate insurance premium is the key issue with this program. With a flat rate there's no accountability. Premiums paid by individual entities need to better reflect that of an actual "insurance" program.
Higher individual premiums paid by those entities who are seasonal in nature or use the program as a buffer to drive their own profits would encourage entities to find ways of keeping personnel employed year round. Therefore allowing individual premiums to be lowered accordingly.
Employees who have a similar history of misusing the EI program should be treated similarly.
This is easily handled on the employee end as there's already a need to indicate a reason for the change of employment on the slip that gets sent to the EI program.
This is how our personal auto insurance premiums are derived. If we have a poor driving record, we pay a higher premium. Therefore making us - hopefully - more responsible drivers as we seek out a lower yearly premium.
This change would also likely make entities more efficient, as well as encourage innovation.
Hi David. I’m a recent university graduate living in PEI. Two months ago, I was looking for a government job, for I had specialized in public policy. However, I found many postings for remote jobs (ex: electronic assistants, customer service, and various administrative roles) with attractive descriptions and competitive pay. Increasingly, I have more friends working remotely for companies outside Atlantic Canada, instead of working locally. It seems as though these jobs appeal to those looking to transition from minimum wage to office administration jobs. Do you have any insights of how this pattern negatively affects the local job market, and how it might progress?
The current flat rate insurance premium is the key issue with this program. With a flat rate there's no accountability. Premiums paid by individual entities need to better reflect that of an actual "insurance" program.
Higher individual premiums paid by those entities who are seasonal in nature or use the program as a buffer to drive their own profits would encourage entities to find ways of keeping personnel employed year round. Therefore allowing individual premiums to be lowered accordingly.
Employees who have a similar history of misusing the EI program should be treated similarly.
This is easily handled on the employee end as there's already a need to indicate a reason for the change of employment on the slip that gets sent to the EI program.
This is how our personal auto insurance premiums are derived. If we have a poor driving record, we pay a higher premium. Therefore making us - hopefully - more responsible drivers as we seek out a lower yearly premium.
This change would also likely make entities more efficient, as well as encourage innovation.