3rdnlng Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 (edited) So, the government is furloughing civilian workers due to the sequestration in order to save money. The Navy has agreed to let them bunch days together so that they can be eligible for unemployment benefits. http://money.cnn.com...fits/index.html The local union affiliate of International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers has signed an agreement with the Navy which would allow their civilian federal workers to group furlough days in one-week blocks. It's a strategy with one key goal: enable those employees to recoup some of their lost wages through unemployment checks. Here's how it works. Bill Coleman, a mechanical engineer who works for the Navy, makes around $104,000 a year, before taxes. Like most Department of Defense employees, he expects to be furloughed for 11 days between July and September. He will lose roughly $4,400 in pay during that stretch. If his furlough days are scattered throughout the three month period, he will not qualify for unemployment benefits in Pennsylvania. Workers in that state cannot earn more than $745 in one week and still qualify for unemployment benefits. Based on government pay grades, the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry estimates most federal employees will not be eligible for benefits unless they work less than 28 hours per week. Indeed, if Coleman works just four days a week -- he would surpass the $745 limit. However, the scenario changes completely now that Coleman can group his furlough days together in five-day blocks. In that case, he will lose a full week of wages at a time, and the state would consider him like any other worker on a temporary layoff. Coleman hopes this will allow him to collect roughly $1,100 in unemployment checks this summer. Edited May 29, 2013 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 Sounds about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 Sounds about right. Are you being serious or are you being sarcastic? Hey, over in the Trayvon thread I asked you a few pages back why you thought Zimmerman had made a bunch of mistakes that night and I haven't heard back from you. If you care to enlighten me please do it over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 (edited) Serious and sarcastic at the same time I suppose. What part of that doesn't sound like government. They'll then tax benefit payments, which they will reimburse state trust funds for dollar for dollar. Don't read the Trayvon thread frequently and unlikely to sift through and find out what you are talking about. Give page number I'll respond. Edited May 29, 2013 by SameOldBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 Serious and sarcastic at the same time I suppose. What part of that doesn't sound like government. They'll then tax benefit payments, which they will reimburse state trust funds for dollar for dollar. Don't read the Trayvon thread frequently and unlikely to sift through and find out what you are talking about. Give page number I'll respond. Simply put, you said Zimmerman made many mistakes that night. I asked you what they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Simply put, you said Zimmerman made many mistakes that night. I asked you what they were. For starters he should have never of followed the kid after he was told not to. Having said that, that still isn't a crime and it appears from the evidence I've seen that he is most likely innocent, specially against 2nd degree murder charges. But let's not pretend that Zimmerman doesn't have Trayvon's blood on his hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 For starters he should have never of followed the kid after he was told not to. Having said that, that still isn't a crime and it appears from the evidence I've seen that he is most likely innocent, specially against 2nd degree murder charges. But let's not pretend that Zimmerman doesn't have Trayvon's blood on his hands. You don't even have to know what mistakes he made to know he made mistakes. A shooting like that doesn't happen without both parties making a whole shitload of mistakes leading up to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 You don't even have to know what mistakes he made to know he made mistakes. A shooting like that doesn't happen without both parties making a whole shitload of mistakes leading up to it. Apparently George made all the right decisions and was labeled a racist and accused of murder for it. As detailed in the Trayvon thread by some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 This discussion belongs in the Trayvon thread where you'll see my most brilliant response to that SOB. For starters he should have never of followed the kid after he was told not to. Having said that, that still isn't a crime and it appears from the evidence I've seen that he is most likely innocent, specially against 2nd degree murder charges. But let's not pretend that Zimmerman doesn't have Trayvon's blood on his hands. I don't think he has Martin's blood on his hands, more likely on his stomach. After all, Martin was smashing GZ's head on the concrete and GZ had to do something. Anyway, by my own admission, this belongs in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Apparently George made all the right decisions and was labeled a racist and accused of murder for it. As detailed in the Trayvon thread by some. I don't think anyone said that. As I recall, the most generous thing anyone said about him was that what he did was perfectly legal, particularly under the "stand your ground" law. Most of that thread was dedicated to complaining about the asinine knee-jerk reactions that he was obviously a racist murderer because he shot a black kid carrying Skittles and wearing a hoodie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Sooo..is this the "talk about anything you want besides the OP" thread? In that case, I like surimi. Don't ask me why, because I have no idea why, nor do I have anything that resembles a supporting argument for why. I made not-crab cakes out of it the other day, with ricotta cheese and the usual crab cake stuff, and it was F'ing Awesome. I am thinking about calling them Benghazi Cakes, since what is in them is an "irrelevant fact". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I am thinking about calling them Benghazi Cakes... At this point, what difference does it make what you call them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 At this point, what difference does it make what you call them? What? No "when you head is rolling down the stairs, then you care what I call them/what is in them" joke? Weak. I wonder: if I sent this recipe to restaurants down south, or a few choice locations here in Buffalo, would the joke sell the food, or, would the food sell the joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I have no sympathy for anyone in the state of PA who earns $104,000.00 per year. With the furlough he's only losing $4,000.00. Big freakin' deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 What? No "when you head is rolling down the stairs, then you care what I call them/what is in them" joke? Weak. Too obvious. Besides, you didn't call them jihad cakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts