EI structure a fair system
Email
Print
Letter to Editor
Share
Updated: July 08, 2009 9:03 AM
Dear Editor:
Re: How exactly is EI unfair to B.C.? (News Views, June 25.)
As a retired Employment Insurance worker of 24 years, I see nothing wrong with EI’s present policy of dividing the country into 58 different economic regions to determine the number of hours needed to qualify, or the subsequent maximum number of weeks of benefits that can be paid.
The policy is no more difficult to administer than if they reduced the number of regions to, say, three (urban, rural and remote,) as proposed by Gordon Campbell et al. In practice, the current system is fair and based on the premise that the higher the regional unemployment rate, the more difficult it is to find work, or to remain employed if work is found.
Your column is a tad misleading in that it perpetuates the myth being put out by uninformed Conservative MPs about the number of weeks of EI benefits that can be paid out: this “45-day work year” nonsense. Few EI recipients qualify to receive anything like 40, 45 or 50 weeks of benefits on their claims.
I’m wondering why the press has been silent on the issue of the surplus in the EI fund. Just a few months ago, that surplus was in the order of $40 billion.
Now, that surplus seems to have disappeared, as evidenced by the Conservatives explanation that at least $5 billion of the projected $50 billion deficit can be attributed to the substantial increase in EI claims. What happened to the $40 billion surplus?
Don Rollins
Vernon
v2
