86 points
*

"he vetoed this bill because the fund the state uses to pay unemployment benefits will be nearly $20 billion in debt by the end of the year.

The fund the state uses to pay unemployment benefits is already more than $18 billion in debt. That’s because the fund ran out of money and had to borrow from the federal government during the pandemic, when Newsom ordered most businesses to close and caused a massive spike in unemployment. The fund was also beset by massive amounts of fraud that cost the state billions of dollars."

The reasoning and background, if anyone is curious

permalink
report
reply
-42 points

There’s plenty of money. He’s union busting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

There’s always money in the banana stand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

Keep the useless pop culture quotes on reddit

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Striking workers should get unemployment checks. Striking workers are unable to work due to no fault of their own. That’s what unemployment is supposed to cover.

A strike can only legally happen if contract negotiations are not making progress. If negotiations have reached an impasse, the union can chose to strike, or management can choose to lockout the workers. As long as the union’s side of the negotiating table are bargaining in good faith, neither a strike nor a lockout is the fault of the workers. Therefore in any just world they would be eligible for unemployment.

permalink
report
reply
28 points

Isn’t that what union dues are for?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It depends on the union. Strike funds are a good idea. Many unions have them. But there are many expenses in operating any organization, and the dues cover all expenses of the union.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Striking workers are literally employed and strike wages are paid out of union dues.

permalink
report
parent
reply

They could choose to be scabs, so I don’t see how it’s not a choice for the workers.

I still think they should get unemployment benefits, or some other type of payment, but you don’t have to be part of a strike. You don’t even have to be part of a union to strike, as you are asserting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Being a scab is against the rules of nearly every union. And California law requires all employees of unionized workplaces to be members of the union. Would be pretty unfair for the state to deny unemployment because you could break the bylaws of the union that the state required you to join.

Strikes are a legally recognized thing. There’s no way the state would provide unemployment to illegal strikes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

That’s a really weird take for someone who looks to be trying to run in the ‘28 race. Why this stance over all the others you’ve taken? This would have been a grand slam policy along with the others he’s approved this minth

permalink
report
reply
4 points

He also vetoed a few other progressive bills. He’s gone from a “politically uninspiring, but at least he’s got fight” to “no, thanks” with this active hippy punching shit. He didn’t even need to do anything, passively signing bills that were voted on by his legislature wouldn’t blow back on him at all, but he’s actively signaling hostility to progressives because he wants to curry favor with people that oppose them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

How is it weird? Unions will endorse him no matter what he does because he’s running against the red team, might as well fuck them over.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Also, he’s a lib, so…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Some people seem to think that Democrats need to actually do things to keep the unions loyal, like American politics is about trading favors and negotiating alliances. In reality all the Democrats need to do is point at the Republican boogeyman and the unions fall in line.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
reply
11 points
*

Unemployment is paid for by employers. Paying unemployment to striking workers is in effect forcing employers to keep paying their employees even though they’re not working.

Keep in mind that California is an at-will employment state.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Just wanted to point out that “Right to work” is a union term.

California, like every U.S. state except Montana, employment is “at will,” meaning that they can fire you for any reason (except for illegal ones like discrimination.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Right to work states are anti union.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Good to know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

forcing employers to keep paying their employees even though they’re not working.

That’s the whole fucking point of unemployment. The insurance rates are paid by companies, but it’s not their money to direct as they please for their own benefit. They’d very much tell ex-employees to go fuck themselves if they could, but they’re forced to pay into the fund that supports them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

My point is that it’s coercive and will drive businesses out of the state.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Regulation is coercive (and good). Businesses aren’t maintaining safety standards and supporting their out-of-work employees out of pure altruism. The real objection for businesses is not that unemployment rates might be marginally higher (people are just regular unemployed way more often than they’re striking), it’s that this increases worker power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

California is not right to work, that means that a person can work in a union shop without being a member of the union. You are thinking of at will.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 467K

    Comments