Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Disarm to collect state unemployment??

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    My wife came home today and told me she had to disarm to collect unemployment
    benefits. She sure know how to spin me up .

    Anyhow, in order to qualify for state unemployment benefits you have to attend a workshop with Work Source (a nationwide) company partnered with the State in the unemployment compensation arena. Their doors in Tacoma are posted "no weapons".
    I can understand, and respect a private business's right to refuse you entry
    with a weapon. But how about a business "partnered" with the state, that you are required by the state to visit, in order to collect your benefits? Doesn't seem right to me. I've asked for an explaination.

    Anyone have insight on this?

    OJ

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    There's more to this than you think.

    Apparently I've gotten word that a few of the CSO's (Community Service Offices) for the DSHS are posting "No weapons, legal or not". Rainier CSO (on MLK street in Seattle) is one of them, and they have a Puget Sound Security private officer there who would have likely enforced it.

    I'll be following up with DSHS on this soon.

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Interesting. It may be the state has no idea this is going on. I don't think they can prohibit being armed in legal places if they are directly associated with it... I could be wrong though.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227

    Post imported post

    Really easy solution: GET A JOB! :celebrate

    Public assistance is socialism. Are you surprised they don't like guns?

    Those on public assistance 'tend' to be the dregs (less than productive, welfare types). Are you surprised that the Admin doesn't want those types bringing firearms on their premises

    *The first comment is just the absolute fact. The second is based on a stereotype. Stereotypes exists because they are 'usually' true, but can always have exceptions.

    All it takes to get a job, at this point in history, is 2 feet and a heart beat.
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    "All it takes to get a job, at this point in history, is 2 feet and a heart beat."

    I find it interesting that you do not include "a spine" in your requirements.

    I am retired with an easily proven track record. I recently inquired about part-time employment to supplement my income and offset the increasing costs of transportation and heating my home. For part-time temp work I am asked to complete a five page application, provide at least three professional references (preferably within the last three years although I have been retired longer than that and outlived many of those whom I have worked with), undergo a criminal history check, clear a child abuse database, pass a drug screening, have an acceptable credit rating, agree to the employer's ideas regarding appropriate attire, etc.while being sensitive to the needs of the company's diverse clientele.... I did not even ask about any policies regardingemployees' personal protection.... It is amazing to me that illegal aliens canreportedlyjust wade across the Rio Grande andbe hired on the spotupon reaching the shore.

    I am reconsidering whether I should forsake my life of leisure and return to slavery.




  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    Hey Dave the dumbass:

    I have a job and have been employed nonstop since I was 15...now 58.
    If its any of your business, it was the wife's job that was eliminated, she 's 56
    and has PAID INTO the insurance fund both as an employer and through taxes as an employee for the last 31 years. Now ****, and address the issue of a state
    partnered business bannig weapons...Is that (issue) O.K with you, or are firearms rights just for those you feel are in the correct social-economic status?

    OJ

  7. #7
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    Whoa.....take a deep breath and chill....no need to fly off the handle, though I do think Dave_pro2awas a little rude with his comments. I've been on unemployment before, and it is a real scam, you pay into this and then you get screwed for most of "your" money that they decide whether you get it or not. But you take anything you can get when the bills are due and no money is in the bank. Don't judge others until you've walked a mile in their shoes, and all that. I've never been on it for long, just a month at most until I found another job, but it did keep us going for the time I was on it, if just barely.

    If we are talking about a state funded agency, then they should not be able to disarm you anyhow. For the time being, I would recommend concealing and work to get this fixed through the right channels. I wouldn't go unarmed to these places with some of the people that I've seen there.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    Yeah you're right. Guys like dave who have never filed an insurance claim, or who would take any job that only required "2 feet and a heartbeat" might not understand why a person with an actual career, might want to file a claim, take some time, and secure quality employment in their field.

    Anyway, these things (signs, not dave) tend to grate on me, because I have tremendous respect for the property rights of business owners, and will not carry past a sign declaring those wishes. I'll just take my business elsewhere, if that's at all possible.
    However, when the State requires me to enter a business they are partnered with in a joint venture...thats a different colored cow.

    What is the course of action any of you would recommend?
    Besides just ignoring the sign...

    OJ



  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Written complaint first. If that does not work, then a lawsuit.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sultan, Washington, USA
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    I Think if you look at the CCL rules you will see that even if you are CCW you can not enter a State Building armed...why should you be able to OCING

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Hillbillly wrote:
    I Think if you look at the CCL rules you will see that even if you are CCW you can not enter a State Building armed...why should you be able to OCING
    Where in the world does it say that?
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    1. It's not a state building. Its a private business at 1305 Tacoma Ave. Suite 201.
    in Tacoma, to which the state requires you to go to.
    2. RCW does not prohibit entry into "state buildings" generally.



    OJ


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sultan, Washington, USA
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    Sorry to all ..I have had my CCL so long that I didn't even know that it had changed...gosh I had to look it up :what:

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Interesting. It may be the state has no idea this is going on. I don't think they can prohibit being armed in legal places if they are directly associated with it... I could be wrong though.
    Not likely...

    I had to go to the DSHS office in Moses Lake a few years ago, and when I entered the building I happened to notice the gunbuster sign with a reference to the Brandishing Law.

    I sent a letter to the AG's office and was basically blown off, so the state is aware and chooses to do nothing about it.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227

    Post imported post

    tjschul wrote:
    Guys like dave who have never filed an insurance claim, or who would take any job that only required "2 feet and a heartbeat" might not understand why a person with an actual career, might want to file a claim, take some time, and secure quality employment in their field.
    Nope. I do NOT pay into unemployment insurance, so I can NOT recieve any benefits.

    If i was hungry, or had to beg the state for money, you're damn straight I'd take any job that only required that the applicant can create fog on the mirror. I'd be the best damn burger flipper in the world, rather than beg for money or mooch off the system.

    I abhore gun grabbers and socialists/communists equally.

    Personally, I would consider a welfare and/or unemployment insurance recipient a defacto "employee of the state." You wife now has a job, paid for by the state... her job is to apply for other jobs while attending training sessions as needed and jumping through whatever other hoop is required (which should include such things as mandatory drug screening, cap on unnecessary/luxury expenditures with accompanying audits, etc).

    Anyways, iirc there was some screwy exceptions to preemption for public/private partnerships in WA. Can't cite the case law, I just have a vauge memory of hearing something about some ruling a few years back. Might want to try a lexis search.

    Hey man, I'm not busting your balls (or your wifes), I was only pointing out that the easiest way to not disarm when collecting unemployment insurance is to get a job. Getting 'approval' to carry would likely take longer than her benefits will last.

    Option B would be: "concealed means concealed."


    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  16. #16
    Regular Member thebastidge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, USA
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    "I do NOT pay into unemployment insurance, so I can NOT recieve any benefits."

    How does that work, as a self-employed person is still required to pay taxes, social security, payroll tax, and unemployment insurance?

    Be prepared. Be very prepared.

    http://swwsurplus.com/ *** 2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd Vancouver WA 98661 *** 360.314.6687
    http://www.facebook.com/SouthWestWashingtonSurplus *** https://twitter.com/SWWSurplus

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    Maybe he is independently wealthy and lives off his inheritance.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    as a self-employed person is still required to pay taxes, social security, payroll tax, and unemployment insurance?
    You're quite wrong about the latter: a self-employed person (whether a sole proprietor or a corp officer) in WA is generally considered exempt for purposes of Employment Security.

  19. #19
    Regular Member j2l3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    871

    Post imported post

    Also, there is no requirement to attend any workshops at any office. To avoid going to the offices, you must make three employer contacts per week and document that. Your claim can be filed online. No need to actually enter an office or even talk to someone.

    The below information comes directly from the states worksource website:



    [line]


    http://fortress.wa.gov/esd/portal/un...its/webpbr.htm


    To be eligible for unemployment benefits, you must be able to work, available for work, and actively seeking work each week that you file a weekly claim for benefits. The following requirements must be met each week you file a weekly claim or you may lose your benefits for the week:


    • You must make at least three employer contacts each week, OR
    • Participate in three approved in-person job search activities at your WorkSource Office or local employment center, OR
    • Have a combination of employer contacts and in-person activities for a total of three.

      Approved in-person job search activities at the WorkSource Office or local employment center include workshops on topics such as job finding tips, interviewing skills, or how to use the Internet to find a job. Other activities that qualify may be offered by your local office.
    CZ 75B 9mm, Ruger P94 .40 S&W, Bersa Thunder .380, AR-15 Homebuild

  20. #20
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    My wife has gotten the same letter about Worksource before, where they tell her if she does not attend the workshops, she will not receive benefits. Basically, if they feel you've applied too often in the last X years for UI benefits, they force you to go through this workshop. That's my understanding at least.

    A lot of things about unemployment and the whole social welfare system, especially in Washington, stinks; I try to avoid it whenever possible.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    j2l3 wrote:
    Also, there is no requirement to attend any workshops at any office. To avoid going to the offices, you must make three employer contacts per week and document that. Your claim can be filed online. No need to actually enter an office or even talk to someone.

    The below information comes directly from the states worksource website:



    [line]


    http://fortress.wa.gov/esd/portal/un...its/webpbr.htm


    To be eligible for unemployment benefits, you must be able to work, available for work, and actively seeking work each week that you file a weekly claim for benefits. The following requirements must be met each week you file a weekly claim or you may lose your benefits for the week:


    • You must make at least three employer contacts each week, OR
    • Participate in three approved in-person job search activities at your WorkSource Office or local employment center, OR
    • Have a combination of employer contacts and in-person activities for a total of three.

      Approved in-person job search activities at the WorkSource Office or local employment center include workshops on topics such as job finding tips, interviewing skills, or how to use the Internet to find a job. Other activities that qualify may be offered by your local office.
    You have to attend an initiation workshop, regardless. they count it as one of your 3 contacts per week.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    Dave_pro2a wrote:
    I abhore gun grabbers and socialists/communists equally.
    And I abhore holier than thou people in general. What YOU "consider anyone'" is not an interest of mine.

    Go flip a burger Dave :celebrate




  23. #23
    Regular Member thebastidge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, USA
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    "a self-employed person (whether a sole proprietor or a corp officer) in WA is generally considered exempt for purposes of Employment Security."

    Fair enough. When I was researching setting up a business, it appeared I would have to pay my own unemployment insurance, but it was a bit ambiguous on whether it was actually required, and I haven't set it upt yet.


    "Also, there is no requirement to attend any workshops at any office. To avoid going to the offices, you must make three employer contacts per week and document that. Your claim can be filed online. No need to actually enter an office or even talk to someone. "

    This is incorrect as of the last (and only) time I filed for UI. I had to attend an orientation briefing. Yes, I was able to file the claim online, but I was required to attend at least one meeting in person. I was on UI for a bit longer than I might have wished, and actually had to attend a second meeting to audit my job search logs.

    There are other voluntary meetings and briefings, such as resume training, interview skills training, etc which will also count as a job search activity if you choose to limit yourself to the 3 job search activities per week. Not a day went by that I didn't have at least one job search contact, as most of my job search activities were online, I would often fill out 10 or more applications per day.

    Anyway, there is absolutely nothing wrong with filing for UI benefits. We are compelled to pay intoit by force of law, as I have since I was 15 years old. I have used it exactly once in my life, but would not hesitate to do so again, any more than I would hesitate to file a claim for insurance were I to have an accident- I have been paying the premiums after all.

    Would I prefer that it was a voluntary system? Absolutely. Would I put up with people who failed to contribute and then cried about it? Absolutely not.

    Be prepared. Be very prepared.

    http://swwsurplus.com/ *** 2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd Vancouver WA 98661 *** 360.314.6687
    http://www.facebook.com/SouthWestWashingtonSurplus *** https://twitter.com/SWWSurplus

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •