A bill moving through the Alabama Legislature could change how people who are unemployed can qualify for benefits.
House Bill 29, sponsored by Rep. Ed Oliver, R-Dadeville, would require people getting unemployment to actively apply for at least five jobs per week, up from the current three.
Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, defended the measure during a public hearing Tuesday, arguing with 127,000 job openings across the state, it is a reasonable expectation.
“What are you doing for 40 hours? Let’s just say it’s an eight to five, an hour for lunch. What’s the harm in requiring a fourth and fifth application in to find a job?,” Orr asked. “Because we can’t sustain people staying on unemployment forever.”
Orr noted if the bill passed, the increased job search requirement would not apply to counties with populations under 20,000.
David Stout, legislative director for Alabama Arise, a nonprofit advocating for low-income and marginalized communities, argued Alabama already has some of the strictest unemployment rules in the country. He believes making the process even tougher will not necessarily push more people into jobs.
“People think that if you can just pass another more stringent bill, you’re going to have people get a job. That’s not so,” Stout asserted. “If you look at unemployment rates in Alabama, it’s about 2.8% in December. If you’re drawing unemployment, you’re looking for a job under already stringent regulations.”
Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham, voiced concerns, warning the bill overlooks major barriers, like transportation and child care, making job searching harder for some.
“You may live in one end of the county but the job may be at the other end,” Coleman-Madison pointed out. “We don’t have infrastructure in place to support, like, public transportation, or transportation of any type.”
The bill cleared a Senate committee, positioning it for final passage in the Senate. It has already passed the House.
Disclosure: Alabama Arise contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy and Priorities, Health Issues, and Poverty Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A new report showed Pennsylvania’s labor market is healthy and strong, with 139,000 more jobs than in early 2020 and a steady unemployment rate of 3.6%.
The report noted since 2022, the Pennsylvania labor market has offered robust job opportunities to workers.
Carrie Amann, executive director of the Pennsylvania Workforce Development Association, said her group’s research assesses how the state’s economy stands now, compared to four years ago and pre-pandemic. She stressed the need for targeted strategies to help more people find and keep jobs.
“When we look at available jobs and workers, we’re seeing a rebalancing,” Amann explained. “What that means is, for every one job in Pennsylvania, we have returned to one worker looking for that one available job. Historically, over the last two years or so, we’ve had about more jobs than available people looking for that job.”
Amann pointed out economic struggles for people who are not college graduates are in the spotlight, with debates on trade, immigration and apprenticeships gaining traction. In Pennsylvania, among working-age men, one in seven is unemployed, highlighting the need for stronger workforce programs and job creation efforts.
Amann described Pennsylvania’s job picture as low unemployment and high workforce participation, especially among historically disadvantaged groups. She added the state is seeing encouraging job gains for Black and Hispanic workers, a group that had seen a peak unemployment rate of over 17%.
“Over the last three years, that unemployment rate has dropped 13 percentage points,” Amann reported. “From 17% in 2020 to 4.1% unemployment in 2023 for Black workers in Pennsylvania is significant growth and opportunity for that population.”
The report found unemployment rates are lower in every county and every Local Workforce
Development Area than before the pandemic, with the largest drop in unemployment in the western half of the state.
get more stories like this via email
Some 45 day care centers in Minnesota temporary closed their doors early this week to highlight the ongoing child care crisis. Advocates said the patchwork of support is not doing much to help families struggling with cost and access.
Dozens of centers took part in the “Day Without Child Care” events, with some halting services Monday and others today.
Justine Olson, a health care worker in the Duluth area, said securing care for her 7-month-old son has been a struggle. Her site is one that briefly closed and she hopes people realize how much of a problem it is for working households.
“I can only dole out so many thousands (of dollars) each month, and child care is obviously one of those thousands,” Olson pointed out. “It’s kind of a Catch 22 right now. You want to go to work, but also, you can’t bring your kid to work.”
Responding to the crisis is seen as a bipartisan issue and states like Minnesota have invested funding to help close gaps. But advocates said concerns like low wages for child care workers continue to keep the service out of reach. Federal funding freezes under the Trump administration have further complicated the issue, as parents and centers monitor the fate of subsidies.
The coalition behind the Minnesota events acknowledged the state Legislature is looking to hold the line on spending this session.
Lydia Boerboom, lead organizer for the Kids Count on Us coalition, said it cannot be just about avoiding budget cuts but rather, finding some room to boost aid, so a vital resource does not collapse.
“Child care is not just something that is nice to have,” Boerboom asserted. “It’s actually a really critical service and need for all of our families, our economy.”
She added at least six child care centers in Minnesota were forced to close in the past year.
Even with the challenge getting more attention in recent years, Olson feels the strain the child care sector is under still is not “top-of-mind” among policymakers or the public.
“I think it should be viewed more as like a service to our country,” Olson suggested. “Kind of like the Postal Service or the police force. They’re not really expected to make money, they’re expected to make our society functional.”
get more stories like this via email
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox has signed House Bill 267 into law, a controversial measure that takes away the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions.
Many union workers voiced their concerns and urged Cox to veto the bill, which they contend would damage unions.
But the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Jordan Teuscher – R-South Jordan, said he heard from many teachers and other public sector workers in the right-to-work state, who weren’t part of a union and felt they didn’t have a voice.
He said now, the bill will allow them to negotiate their own employment terms.
“Teachers talked about where they had an idea, a change that they wanted – in insurance is an example,” said Teuscher, “and they went to the administration to ask them about that and the administration said, ‘Well, you’re going to have to go talk to the union about it.’ And so they’d go to the union to talk about it and the union says ‘well, you’re not a member, we don’t really care what you think.'”
Teuscher contended the law will make public employers’ wages and benefits more competitive.
He added that employers will continue to “value and listen to the priorities” of union leaders, as they’ll still represent a significant portion of workers.
In a statement, the Utah Education Association – a union which represents 18,000 public school teachers – said they’re not letting the “setback” stop them, and said this moment reinforces the importance of unions.
While lawmakers considered a compromise, they couldn’t reach an alternative.
In a statement Cox said, “Utah has long been known as a state that can work together to solve difficult issues. I’m disappointed that in this case, the process did not ultimately deliver the compromise that at one point was on the table and that some stakeholders had accepted.”
Teuscher argued that no one worked harder than he did to reach that compromise.
“I met daily, multiple times a day with different union leaders,” said Teuscher, “to try to get to the end of the road, something that the Senate could be comfortable with and the House could be comfortable with that was short of the ban.”
Teuscher contended public employees that like their unions are going to continue being members and have unions advocate on their behalf.
But labor groups fear if public entities were resistant to listening to concerns before, now they likely won’t listen to a single employee.
get more stories like this via email
