BILL NUMBER:  S3359

 TITLE OF BILL :

An act to amend the labor law, in relation to unemployment benefits
for innocent bystanders during an industrial controversy


 PURPOSE :

This bill would protect innocent bystanders who suffer periods of
unemployment as the result of a strike in which they are not
participating by removing the seven-week waiting period for
unemployment benefits that otherwise applies. It would also delete the
requirement that employers pay interest on unemployment benefits
improperly suspended when employers mislead the Commissioner regarding
their intention to rehire striking workers at the conclusion of the
strike.

 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS :

Section 1 of the bill would amend Labor Law § 592(1) to remove the
seven-week waiting period for receipt of unemployment benefits that
currently applies to claimants who have lost their jobs due to a
strike or other industrial controversy, for claimants who are
"innocent bystanders." Specifically, the bill would exempt a claimant
              

from the seven-week waiting period where the Commissioner determines
that the claimant is not working for an employer or bargaining unit
involved in the industrial controversy, and is not otherwise
participating in the controversy. This section also deletes the
requirement that employers pay interest on benefits improperly
suspended against worker who are replaced during the strike and are
not re-hired once the strike ends, after their employer certified to
the Commissioner that the workers were being replaced on a temporary
basis and would be re-hired.

Section 2 of the bill would establish an immediate effective date and
provide that the bill will apply to loss of employment beginning on or
after the effective date.

 EXISTING LAW :

Labor Law § 592 requires a seven-week waiting period prior to
eligibility for unemployment insurance benefits for claimants who
become unemployed as a result of a strike, regardless of whether they
are participating in the strike. Labor Law § 592 also requires
employers to pay interest and a penalty on unemployment benefits
improperly suspended against strikers when their employers mislead the
Commissioner regarding their intention to rehire the workers when the
strike ends.

 PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY :

This is a new proposal.

 STATEMENT IN SUPPORT :

Unemployment insurance benefits are intended to provide a critical
safety net to workers who lose their employment through no fault of
their own by preserving some income for the unemployed worker and his
or her family.  Individuals who are unable to work because their place
of employment is closed or their work is interrupted as a result of a
strike in which they are not involved, should be eligible to take
advantage of the protection afforded by the unemployment insurance
law. Under current law, striking employees may receive unemployment
benefits, but must wait seven weeks before being eligible for
benefits. This legislation is intended to ensure that innocent
bystanders who do not participate in the strike and whose employers or
bargaining units are not included in the strike, but who lose their
jobs nonetheless as a result of the strike, are not penalized by also
having to wait seven weeks to receive benefits. The bill would also
help secondary employers who are not responsible for the strike to
retain their workforce, where they are compelled to suspend operations
and layoff workers due to a downturn in business from the strike. By
allowing their workers to receive unemployment benefits, the workers
will have income to support their families during the strike and may
be less likely to look for other jobs before the strike ends.

In addition, the bill would eliminate the requirement that employers
pay interest on unemployment benefits for workers who were not
re-hired at the conclusion of a strike in violation of an employer's
commitment. Chapter 609 of the laws of 2008 created the interest
remedy to compensate employees where their employers certified to the
Commissioner that replacement workers hired during the strike were
temporary replacements when, in fact, they were retained following the
strike. In addition, the Chapter added a significant employer penalty
of $750 per employee for each week of benefits lost as a result of the
employer deception. The change included in this bill will not affect
that penalty. It would merely eliminate an interest payment which
would in most circumstances be a nominal monetary amount that would
cost far more to implement and administer than the resulting benefit
to the employee.

 BUDGET IMPLICATIONS :

There is no fiscal impact associated with this proposal.

 EFFECTIVE DATE :
This proposal would take effect immediately and apply to loss of
employment beginning on or after such effective date.