Texas Senate Bill SB689

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Caption

Relating to excluding certain short-term employment from unemployment compensation chargebacks and grounds for benefit disqualification.

Impact

If enacted, SB689 would modify current state laws surrounding unemployment benefits, particularly in how short-term employment is treated in relation to unemployment compensation. By specifying that benefits cannot be charged to an employer's account for employees in certain conditions, the bill could serve as a precautionary measure for businesses, especially those that frequently hire short-term or temporary staff. Additionally, it aims to create a more defined framework for what constitutes suitable work, impacting both employees and employers in their relinquishing of unemployment benefits.

Summary

SB689 relates to amendments in the Texas Labor Code, specifically addressing unemployment compensation chargebacks and the criteria for benefit disqualification regarding certain short-term employments. The bill seeks to delineate circumstances under which employers would not incur chargebacks on the unemployment compensation account for employees who worked for less than four weeks, provided that the work was deemed unsuitable and the employee was receiving benefits at the time of employment. This legislative intent appears to aim at reducing the financial impact on employers while accommodating the nuances of temporary employments.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB689 seems to reflect a balance between employer protection and employee rights. Supporters of the bill may view it as a way to create a more favorable environment for businesses, particularly in sectors that rely heavily on short-term labor. However, there may also be concerns about the implications for employees who find themselves in short-term positions and how this impacts their ability to secure unemployment benefits if their employment does not meet the new definitions of suitability.

Contention

One notable point of contention likely involves the definition of 'suitable work' and who ultimately determines that classification. This aspect could lead to disagreements regarding the adequacy of protections for workers in temporary positions and whether the revisions adequately safeguard employees' rights to unemployment benefits. Furthermore, while the bill appears straightforward, the interpretations and applications of the newly defined terms could spark debate among stakeholders regarding fairness and practicality for employees relying on such benefits.