The education union has taken advantage of the opportunity to cash-in on the COVID-19 outbreak to receive benefits for which it is currently ineligible. SB 1702 describes the bill as a temporary authorization of payment of unemployment insurance benefits to individuals performing services in other than instructional, research or principal administrative capacity for educational institution or institution of higher education in circumstances in which payment is currently denied.

Payments that are currently denied are excess of any salary, like bonus payments. How does a COVID-19 outbreak with a shortage of funds justify paying bonuses? Especially for research that isn’t of an emergency nature?

To throw the public off track, this statement was added to the bill: “If the United States Secretary of Labor serves notice that any provision of section 2 of this 2020 second special session Act, or rule adopted under section 2 of this 2020 second special session Act, fails to meet the requirements of the Social Security Act or the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, the nonconforming provision or rule shall no longer be of any force or effect.”

So what does SB 1702 say that the U.S. Secretary of Labor might not like? “The denial of benefits and compensation under ORS 657.221 (1) to (4) does not apply to benefits and compensation otherwise payable to individuals for weeks beginning on or after May 1, 2020, and ending before December 1, 2020.” When has the federal government questioned state authority for lifting restrictions on compensation?

ORS 657.221 states what is ineligible for benefits of certain educational institution employees. The provisions SB 1702 wants to suspend or allow for payment is research based on other than instructional research payable at the same rate as other services and if not performed during a customary vacation period or holiday. Benefits are not paid when more than 50% of time is performed for an education service district. Employees who terminate employment due to labor negotiations or dispute, the separation shall be considered an involuntary leave or layoff.

Suspending laws that has the effect of increasing compensation beyond regular compensation doesn’t benefit those really needing help. It deserves questioning. Is this political payback setting the stage for a repeal in the regular session?


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2020-08-10 06:38:04