Laid-Off Cleveland Teachers Unable To Collect Unemployment

[liberal N proud]

CLEVELAND - The Cleveland Teachers' Union is looking for some answers after dozens of laid-off teachers are unable to collect unemployment benefits. The union is blaming a school district in crisis, reported 5 On Your Side education specialist Debora Lee.

Former Cleveland teacher Caren Nakhooda understands why she and hundreds of other teachers were laid off last year, but she can't understand why she hasn't been able to collect unemployment benefits this summer.

The Ohio Office of Employment Compensation says Nakhooda is ineligible for benefits because there's reasonable assurance of employment in the coming school year.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8989532/

:wtf:

[salin]

1. wonder if there is an "investment fund" backing

the unemployment benefits payouts, that has been used as a GOP investment slush fund, losing money (like the bureau of workmans comp) in Ohio - so that while they cut back who they grant benefits to - they don't pay attention to which GOP funders/investors lose money for the fund.

Back to this story - seems odd - are they going to give a check retroactively to those not rehired? (That is cover the weeks they refused to cover now due to their "reasonable assurance" rule?

[PowerToThePeople]

2. Fuck the capitalists!

Line them up, gun them down. She has earned unemployment benifits. A portion of her paycheck goes to that fund. She is not collecting a check now. How does the possibility of getting a check in the next year stop her from being on the street, starving in a couple of months? It's about revolution time....

[tsuki]

4. Do Ohio Workers pay their own unemployment? eoq

[mtnester]

3. Denial of unemployment because you THINK the person may be

employed in the coming year....WRONG!

Lawyers out there?

[Blue Diadem]

5. It appears the letter saying they "might" sub has something to do with it,

which still doesn't make any sense imo. It's not continual employment and it may only be a day or two at a time. What I'm wondering is if that letter changed the teachers' status from full time teacher to substitute..and did the school district purposely do that to prevent payment of unemployment.