►
From YouTube: Unemployment Insurance Reform Task Force (10/28/21)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
D
A
A
In
the
meantime,
we're
gonna
move
on
with
our
agenda
today
we
do
have
a
a
pretty
ambitious
schedule,
so
we
want
to
hop
right
into
that.
So
at
this
point
our
first
item
is
number
three
unemployment
insurance
policy
recommendations.
I
would
like
like
to
ask
secretary
link
director,
hoskinson
and
legislative
director
eaves.
If
you'll
come
forward.
A
E
Good
morning,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
task
force,
thank
you
for
having
us
today,
we'll
start
off
and
again
making
introductions.
My
name
is
jamie
link.
I'm
the
secretary
of
the
kentucky
labor
cabinet
with
me
is
buddy
hoskinson,
the
executive
director
of
the
office
of
unemployment
insurance
and
ms
morgan
eaves,
our
legislative
director
at
the
labor
cabinet.
E
Please
so
you've
seen
this
powerpoint
slide
before
you
had
asked
that
we
update
for
fiscal
year
2021,
which
we
have
through
the
second
quarter,
you'll
see
that
the
last
bar
on
the
on
the
far
right
and
what
this
slide
obviously
depicts
is
the
extraordinary
number
of
claims
that
were
filed
in
in
2020
and,
obviously
we
know
a
lot
of
the
reasons
why
certainly
the
the
coven
19
pandemic
totally
exacerbated
the
system
and
flooded
the
unemployment
insurance
system
with
with
a
number
of
claims
and
then
you'll
notice
in
in
calendar.
2021.
E
F
F
and
then
also,
if
you
with
ural's,
help
in
the
past
session.
Again,
you
will
see
that
we
continue
to
work
the
waivers
and
again,
if
you
recall
those
waivers,
are
available
to
individuals
who
had
an
office
error
from
january,
the
27th
of
2020
through
december
31st
of
2020,
and
so
I
know
those
numbers
there
say
6170,
but
as
of
this
morning,
it's
6
211
and
that
is
gone.
The
amount
is
a
little
point
over
9.4
million
at
this
time.
F
So
in
looking
at
in-person
in
in
phone
information.
As
far
as
our
calls
since
april
15th
of
to
october
20th,
we
have
assisted
more
than
60
000
individuals
in
person
and
again
those
appointments
become
available
every
day
at
9
00
a.m,
monday
through
thursday,
and
as
you
can
also
see
the
total
number
scheduled
now.
One
of
the
good
notes
that
we've
talked
about
in
this
committee
and
in
on
this
task
force
is:
does
everybody
have
to
come
to
a
local
office?
Do
they
have
to
drive
all
the
way
across?
F
We
started
in
the
past
month
that
now
they
can
just
choose
to
do
it
in
person,
and
we
have
75
percent
of
those
who
schedule
appointments
now
going
to
versus
in
person
to
phone
excuse
me
and
then,
if
below.
If
you
see
again
in
the
call
center,
you
will
see
that
I
think.
Last
month
we
reported
to
you
about
94
to
95.
000
calls
we're
up
to
over
102
thousand
calls,
and
we
do
that
in
two
shifts
at
the
call
center
monday,
through
friday,
currently
from
8
00
to
8
pm
eastern
standard
time,.
E
E
I
am
not
a
member
of
that
evaluation
team.
Thus,
I
do
not
know
how
many
proposals
were
received
at
this
time
and
the
finance
administration
cabinet
will
manage
that
process,
as
they
always
do,
but,
as
you
know,
there's
an
estimated
budget
of
47
and
a
half
million
dollars
that
have
been
set
aside
for
this
project.
30
million
of
that
is
through
restricted
funds,
10
million
dollars
in
bond
funds,
and
then
you
appropriated
and
a
half
million
dollars
in
general
fund
support
after
the
vendor
is
selected.
E
We
anticipate
that
it
will
take
anywhere
from
18
to
24
months
to
implement
or
to
develop
and
implement
that
new
I.t
system.
But
in
the
interim
I
would
add
we
are
taking
every
measure
we
possibly
can
to
improve
upon
the
existing
system,
with
fraud,
prevention
measures
and
other
efficiencies
that
we
can
find
in
upgrading
the
current
system,
because
obviously,
we've
got
a
year
and
a
half
or
two
years
before
the
new
system
will
be
implemented,
and
we
need
to
make
improvements
now.
F
Okay,
last
secretary.
A
E
Because
the
expedited
time
frame,
we
were
looking
to
to
implement
that
they
felt
like
a
pro
a
system
of
this
size
and
complexity.
They
they
requested
one
more
week
to
finalize
their
proposals
for
us.
Okay,.
A
G
Thank
you
talk
about
the
system
as
you
upgrade
it
a
couple
things
I've
looked
at.
I
noticed
you
reported
today,
which
is
great.
The
numbers
are
coming
down
in
ui,
it's
going
to
take
two
to
three
years
to
build
this
system.
Yes,
sir.
So
what
we
have
right
now
is
adequate
you're
telling
me
for
two
to
three
years.
So
are
we
upgrading
because
we
need
to
or
want
to.
E
G
E
Several
components
of
it
date
back
to
the
early
80s
or
late
70s
as
a
matter
of
fact,
and
it's
just
not
tenable-
to
continue
with
a
system
like
that
going
forward
in
my
first
appearance
before
this
task
force,
I
used
the
term
we're
building
the
church
for
easter
sunday
because
we
can't
predict
the
future,
but
should
another
occurrence
like
this
happen,
I
don't
think
any
of
us
want
to
go
through
another
situation
like
we've
gone
through
the
last
18
plus
months.
E
E
We
had
two
responses,
so
that's
what
we
want
to
work
with
this
task
force
on
are
measures
that
we
can
take
to
improve,
not
only
the
technology
that
we
utilize,
but
also
the
staffing
and
I'm
sure,
there'll
be
further
discussion
on
on
some
other
measures
that
we
could
take.
But
those
will
likely
require
staffing,
so
we'll
be
looking
at
ways
that
we
can
work
with
the
general
assembly
and
work
with
the
administration
to
improve
both
of
those
resources
to
make
it
that
we
don't
have
this
situation
again
in
the
future.
B
B
H
B
G
Yes,
I
understand
it's
old
again
when
I
say
that-
and
maybe
I
didn't
ask
questions
right,
my
concern
is
you've
got
a
two
to
three
year,
plus
or
more,
as
we
know,
with
most
government
projects.
If
they
say
two
years,
it's
five
years
say
five
years,
it's
20
years,
you're
we're
going
to
be
stuck
with.
This
is
two
to
three
years.
Is
there
not
a
better
system
or
is
not
something
we
can
do
other
than
build
it
from
the
ground
up,
and
that
appears
what
we're
doing
is
building
this
from
the
ground
up.
G
E
So
there
will
be
obviously
a
build
of
this,
but
it
will
be
built
with
existing
technology,
so
our
hope
is-
and
it's
it's
on
us
to
administer
these
contracts
and
to
hold
vendors
accountable
and
responsible
for
their
performance.
So
my
goal
is
18
to
24
months.
I
don't
even
want
to
go
to
three
years
and
you
know.
Obviously
we
want
to
control
the
cost
as
well.
So
in
the
interim
we
certainly
don't
believe
that
we'll
have
the
the
crushing
amount
of
claims
that
happened
in
2020.
G
G
Basically
when
we
could
drive
a
chevrolet
we're
looking
for
a
mercedes-benz.
So
that's
my
concern
that
we're
doing
it
and
that's
again
that
I
want
to
make
sure
we
spend
our
taxpayer
dollars
wisely
in
doing
this,
because
this
is
a
lot
of
money,
we're
getting
ready
spent
on
the
system
that
I
think
that
at
least
my
opinion
there's
a
cheaper
way
to
go.
So
I'd
love
you
guys
to
look
at
that.
Hopefully
you
have
looked
at
that
because
we
are
stewardess
taxpayers
dollars
and
it's
our
job
to
make
sure
they're
spent
wisely.
E
I
couldn't
agree
with
you
more
representative
pratt
and
I
would
also
add
that
we
communicate
regularly
with
the
u.s
department
of
labor
and
the
region
3
staff,
and
we
are
always
asking
about
best
practices
or
what
other
states
are
doing
to
address
this
issue
and
if
okay,
I'd
like
to
to
contact
you
after
the
meeting
and
and
see
kind
of
what
some
sources
you
may
have
heard
that
we
may
not
know,
we
feel,
like
we've
done
an
extensive
search,
but
if
you've
got
some
further
information.
I'd
love
to
pick
your
brain
about
that.
I
It's
more
of
an
explanation,
representative
pratt
brings
up
a
great
thing:
he's
always
worried
about
cost
he's
almost
as
cheap,
let's
say
frugal
as
I
am,
but
being
in
the
cabinet
that
had
unemployment
and
formerly
in
the
labor
cabinet,
with
workers
comp
that
we
put
in
a
new
system
that
was
not
off
the
shelf
that
we
built
it
from
the
ground
up.
Sometimes,
when
you
buy
something
off
the
shelf,
you
have
no
ability
to
update
it
and
they
have
the
code
and
you
don't
with
workers
comp.
I
We
we
took
it
from
ground
up
and
now
we're
able
to
change
it
as
we
want
we
own
the
code.
So
if
there
is
one
off
the
shelf,
we
can
use
for
the
future
too.
That
would
be
great
now
and
then
I
think
he
alluded
to
also
if
this
system
is
working
now
with
this
big
problem,
then
why
do
we
even
need
a
system?
Well,
let
me
answer
that,
because
cnn
did
did
a
report
on
former
governor
beshear
in
2008
was
given
money
to
upgrade
the
system
and
did
not
so
then.
I
Yes,
it
was
fine
and
okay
for
a
while,
and
governor
bevin
decided
that
it
was
antiquated
and
we
were
already
in
process
of
putting
in
a
new
computer
system-
and
there
was
money
by
the
legislature
put
in
for
that.
It's
just
that
this
culvert
hit
so
quickly
and
so
hard
that
the
now
governor
beshear
was
in
the
system
was
unable
to
handle
it.
I
So
by
not
putting
the
new
system
in
now
or
are
if
we
can't
find
an
off-the-shelf
appropriate
computer
system,
we're
just
doing
it
again
and
we're
asking
for
failure
again
and
we
it
can't
handle
what
ordinary
anyway,
the
system
we
were
trying
to
put
in-
and
hopefully
you
are
too
will
also
help
with
the
new
career
centers.
Yes,
not
just
unemployment
put
it
in
and
get
your
unemployment,
it
will
help
with
careers,
and
it
will
help
find
jobs
and
a
better
career
for
people.
I
So
I
think
that
if
we
handle
it
properly,
that
it
is
a
great
investment
that
was
already
in
process
and-
and
I
think
that
your
concerns
I
think,
are
exactly
right,
but
I
think
that
we
need
to
go
on
and
get
this
computer
system.
E
And
senator
nemes,
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
and
couldn't
agree
more
I'm
not
an
I.t
professional,
obviously,
but
we
we
do
know
that
a
lot
of
times
and
we've
all
probably
experienced
this
before
you
know
with
I.t
systems
to
representative
pratt's
comments.
They
say
it's
going
to
be
10
million
and
take
two
years
and
ends
up
costing.
25
million
dollars
takes
five
years
and
we
are
aware
of
that
and
we
are
not
going
to
get
back
into
that
situation.
E
But
to
your
point,
it's
the
long-term
maintainability
of
a
system
as
well,
and
if
you
buy
someone
else's
code,
they
own
that
code
and
every
time
you
have
to
go,
do
something
you
have
to
pay
them
to
manipulate
that
code.
So
I
appreciate
your
point
that
by
us
owning
the
the
system
and
the
code,
we
will
be
responsible
and
have
control
over
our
future
when
it
comes
to
a
system
like
this.
So
I
appreciate
that
very
much.
A
One
question
I
have
before
we
let
mr
hoskinson
pick
up
how
much
has
been
spent
at
this
point
on
upgrades
to
the
system
as
of
right
now.
What
are
we
looking
at
that
we've
already
expended.
E
I
don't
have
that
number
in
front
of
me
right
now,
but
that's
a
good
question.
I
can
get
that
information.
B
And
when
just
for
clarification,
do
you
mean?
Are
you
referencing
federal
funds,
covert
related
funds,
general.
B
F
All
right,
thank
you,
so
constitutes
just
a
piggyback
on
everything
that
you
already
asked
or
talked
about
this
morning
is
what
we
mentioned
to
you
last
time.
We
are
in
the
second
cohort
of
the
tiger
team,
which
is
having
experts
from
all
over
the
country
and
through
the
federal
government,
look
at
our
program
and
do
a
deep
dive
to
see
where
we
can
make
those
improvements.
And
what
are
we
doing?
What
is
what
are
good
practices?
What
are
things
that
we?
Maybe
we
can
adjust
and
tweak
a
little
bit
to
get
those
quick
wins.
F
So
it's
an
eight
week
process
we
kicked
off
on
october,
the
5th
my
team
and
other
leadership
members
throughout
the
cabinet
are
already
conducting
the
interviews
and
the
meetings
we've
supplied
them.
It's
almost
like
another
internal
audit.
If
you
want
to
think
of
it
in
terms
of
that
process,
it's
our
way
to
reevaluate.
So
when
we
do
work
refusal
which
we
do,
how
are
we
handling
that
work
refusal?
Do
we
have
enough
staff
resources
to
do
the
work
reviews
and
once
that
comes
in?
Does
the
employer
understand
their
responsibility
to
the
work
refusal?
F
So
we
do
partner
with
naswa
our
national
organization
with
idh
to
do
cross
matches.
We
do
already
look
at
banking
and
routing
numbers
to
see
if
there
are
certain
banks
that
pull
out,
which
we've
already
stopped.
If
you
recall
back
in
early
april,
that's
the
reason
why
we
shut
down
for
four
or
five
days
is
to
do
those
pin
resets
to
put
that
dual
authentication
process
in
to
make
sure
that
you
are
who
you
are
you
asked
about
software
or
vendor
programs?
F
Id
me
id
me
was
something
that
we
are
one
of
about
24-25
other
states
in
this
country
that
have
started
using
id
me.
That's
a
federally
certified
program
that
the
irs
uses
idme
currently
sets
in
the
middle
of
our
program
of
a
claim
to
validate
who
you
are
and
that
we
know
that
who
you
are
idme
is
getting
ready
to
launch
on
november
4th
in
front
of
everything.
So
that's
one
more
protection
for
the
claimant
and
one
more
protection
for
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky.
F
If
you
have
not
registered
through
idme,
you
will
have
to
do
that
in
order
to
even
go
or
start
a
claim,
so
to
the
point
of
the
the
backlog
or
to
the
work
that
we
have
existing
representative
pratt.
This
will
create
multiple
issues
being
created,
because
if
you
haven't
cleared
that
first
clearinghouse
you
go
nowhere,
that
claim
is
not
valid
and
so
that
in
itself
will
be
a
a
great
tool
for
us.
If
we
could
have
the
next
slide,
please
so
some
of
the
things
that
you
ask
us
to
come
back.
F
What
are
things
that
we
can
do
to
assist
or
that
you
could
do
to
assist
us,
and
so
what
we're
going
to
tell
you
is
us,
assist
us
with
probably
the
short
term
short
time
compensation
program.
What
we
want
to
do
is
help
employers
but
help
the
claimant
as
well,
and,
as
you
see
right
there,
it
prevents
layoffs
by
allowing
employers
to
have
reduced
hours
rather
than
laying
them
off.
When
you
lay
off
somebody
you,
you
have
the
potential
of
losing
that
skilled
workforce.
F
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
to
build
that
not
allow
that
to
happen.
So
we
would
create
an
application,
much
like
we've
done
in
other
programs
to
submit
from
the
employers
to
the
cabinet
that
we
could
review
and
make
sure
it's
approval.
So
when
those
employers
need
to
use
that
service,
we
can
then
enact
those,
because
we
know
that
they're
already
part
of
an
approval
process
and
they
already
understand,
we
will
have
already
educated
them
to
know
what
they
need
to
do
next
go
ahead
to
the
next
slide.
F
I'm
sorry
because
I
may
have
jumped
a
little
bit
ahead,
so
I
apologize
so
a
total
of
27.
Other
states
already
do
this
per
the
united
states
department
of
labor.
When
we
sought
out
the
feedback,
we
would
have
to
have
a
statutory
change,
and
so
you
see
that
on
the
third
bullet,
krs
341
0803
expanding
the
definition
of
partial
employment
compensation
would
be
necessary.
F
We
would
need
just
like
with
the
work
refusal,
as
you
all
make
changes
and
as
we
work
together
to
make
those
changes,
we're
going
to
need
staff
to
do
that.
A
part
of
the
opportunity
has
been
that
we
are
short
staffed
and
we
are
trying
to
skill
staff
up
secretary
link
mentioned
about
only
two
adjudicators
coming
in
you,
don't
walk
off
the
street
being
an
adjudicator.
F
F
G
The
on
the
short
time
compensation
compensation
right
here,
the
money
that's
paid.
Does
that
still
count
against
employers
account?
Does
it
come?
Does
it,
as
you
know,
the
more
unemployment
you
file
or
have
people
file
for
the
higher
your
ui
rate
goes
up
that
the
employer
pays
in.
Will
this
also
be
the
same?
It
will
still
go
against
the
employer's
account,
which
makes
again
I'm
for
it.
But
do
they
understand
that
when
they
do
this,
their
ui
account
is
going
to
go
up
and
they're
going
to
have
to
pay
more
into
the
system?
F
F
Be
a
charge
to
that
again,
we're
just
talking
about
a
pro
rated,
because
you're
talking
less
money,
ultimately
going
out,
so
there's
still
going
to
be
a
charge,
because
you've
got
to
also
take
care
of
your
system
right.
You've
got
to
build
back
into
the
system
and
that's
a
confusion
that
many
claimants
don't
understand.
Is
that
you,
as
I
know
you
live
in
my
I
live
in
your
district
and
you
have
a
business
you
pay
into
that
every
day.
F
G
E
F
F
If
at
no
fault
of
their
own-
and
it
was
an
office
error,
then
they
have
that
ability
to
have
that
waiver.
The
secretary
gives
them
a
notice
through
a
letter
and
also
on
their
account
that
they
have
30
days
to
apply
for
that
waiver.
We
started
that
program
back
in
june
of
this
year
and
continue
as
we
work
people
through
the
backlog
and
through
our
adjudication
process
if
they're
eligible,
and
they
were
in
that
time
frame,
they
still
have
that
opportunity.
F
So
with
that,
what
we're
asking
is
so,
let's
go
back
and
revisit
that
topic
again
and
make
sure
that
we
have
all
the
things
all
the
I's
and
all
the
t's.
The
way
that
we
need
to
so
that
a
we
stay
in
compliance
and
that
we're
able
to
serve
the
citizens
of
the
commonwealth
when
there
are
errors,
and
so
we
will
be
wanting
and
seeking
some
additional
assistance
with
how
we
are
able
to
move
forward
through
a
waiver,
because,
right
now
we
are
one
of
those
few
states
who
do
do
not
have
that
ability.
A
Thank
you.
I
do
have
a
couple
of
folks
that
had
questions,
and
I
want
to
get
to
those
right
now.
Representative.
Branskin.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
today.
I
had
a
question
and
I
believe
it
was
slide
four
when
it's
showing
the
the
in-person
and
phone
data.
One
of
the
numbers
that
I'm
looking
at
here
is
the
pin
assistance
and
it
looks
like
64
851.
A
F
Yes,
so
that
was
what
we
did
back
in
april
when
we
took
the
system
down
to
verify
the
person
we
put
in
that
two
authentication
step
authentication,
and
so
they
now
had
to
get
a
pen.
So
we
spent
14
days
in
early
april
taking
that
down
and
sending
out
those
notices
for
everybody
to
to
do
that.
So
a
big
part
of
that
number
is
that
first
14
days
and
then
obviously
those
who
are
coming
into
the
system
who've
never
had
the
system,
maybe
don't
understand
how
to
set
the
pin.
A
Okay,
that
that
was
leading
to
my
follow
up,
because
I'm
I'm
sitting
here
looking
at
the
the
claim,
assistance
sitting
at
37,
000
and
then
looking
at
pin
assistance
is
64
000,
so
not
quite
double,
but
almost
double
the
the
number
of
issues
there
and
you
know
I'm
sitting
there
looking
like
well.
If
we
get
the
pin
issue
cleaned
up,
that
should
free
up
some
some
so.
F
It's
a
one
button
or
two
button
that
you
push
on
the
phone
to
get
that
assistant,
so
we
know
who's
receiving
that
call
what
they're
needing
and
so
oftentimes
that
will,
if
you
go
into
it
today,
they
are
really
just
going
in
totality
of
that
claim
so
there
if
it
is
a
pin,
assistance
they'll,
do
it
if
they
need
a
little
bit
more
assistance
to
something
else.
They
do
it
too.
That's
just
how
we
have
it
broken
down
in
our
aws
system.
When
we
report
out.
A
More,
mr
chairman,
branskin,
thank
you.
I
guess
my
last
question
is
the
the
waiver.
I
believe
you
said
we're
up
to
around
6
200
claims
that
have
been
processed.
Do
we
know
how
many
have
been
denied
and
the
reason
I'm
asking
is
because
I
just
I
want
to
make
sure
these
are
being
thoroughly
vetted
and
that
you
know
they're
being
checked
out.
F
Yes,
I
I
believe
the
last
time
that
I
pulled
that
number
about
a
week
or
so
ago.
We
were
about
700
that
didn't
either
complete
the
affidavit
appropriately
didn't
check
the
box,
didn't
sign
the
box
or
didn't
maybe
understand
so
before
they're
completely
denied.
As
you
said,
we
are
vetting
them
through
appeals.
A
F
A
Good
deal.
Thank
you,
representative,
sharp.
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
here.
You
may
proceed.
Thank
you
for
you
guys
appearing
today,
and
first
thing
I
want
to
say
is
I
got
my
first
call
talking
about
what
a
pleasurable
experience
they
had
at
the
ashland
unemployment
office.
Getting
things
taken
care
of,
so
things
are
moving
in
the
right
direction.
I'm
the
complaints
have
dropped
off,
and
I've
gotten
actually
a
positive
feedback.
F
So
I
knew
that
was
probably
coming,
so
I
made
sure
I
pulled
the
numbers
again
so
when
we
we
look
at,
we
have
about
84
000
claimants.
In
total,
we
have
about
60,
000
claimants,
who
have
now.
Let
us
remember
that
you
may
have
multiple
issues
within
your
claim
or
repeat
issues.
We
have
60
000
of
those
that
are
basically
in
the
ui
and
about
another
3
800
of
those
in
the
peuc
program,
underneath
the
pandemic
and
in
the
pandemic
unassisted
program
about
another
20
000
of
those
in
that
totality
of
number.
K
F
Yes,
sir,
so
first
thank
you
for
the
compliment
because,
again
I
think
staff
don't
hear
that
often.
So
we
appreciate
that
very
much
so
when
the
career
centers
opened
up
in
april,
we
started
training
staff
and
order.
As
you
all
recall,
we
were
not
in
the
unemployment.
The
career
centers
didn't
have
ui
for
a
number
of
years
in
the
offices,
so
we
introduced
that
back
in
so
many
of
those
individuals
who
come
in
and
they
are
on
the
list
to
be
adjudicated
or
to
have
issues.
F
They
are
seen
right
then,
and
there
what
I
will
tell
you
one
of
the
things
that
we
do
see
that
we're
trying
to
work
on
now
is
that
tends
to
push
them
up
and
maybe
some
older
claims
down.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
come
up
with
a
plan
that-
and
we
are
working
on
that
right
now-
that
we
can
focus
on
what
is
left
in
2020
we've
been
drilling
down
in
multiple
sessions
on
what
are
like
issues.
What
are
repeat
issues.
F
What
are
things
that
we
can
then
send
back
to
the
claim
and
say
if
you
don't
move
on
this
issue,
we
are
going
to
suspend
your
claim
because
we
see
no
activity
coming
from.
We
are
working
on,
as
I
introduced
last
committee
meeting,
the
new
summary
page.
That
again
would
tell
you,
sir,
that
if
you
were
looking
at
your
page,
these
are
the
four
things
outstanding
from
you:
here's
what
we're
waiting
on
and
vice
versa,
the
same
thing
back.
Those
are
all
good
things
that
we're
working
on
now
and
hopefully,
we'll
have
launched
very
soon.
F
We
know
from
april
of
21
to
now
what
we
did
with
the
pin
reset
helped
tremendously
what
we're
doing
on
november
4th.
Well
again,
as
the
secretary
says,
we're
building
that
church
for
easter
sunday
will
help
us
even
more
so
in
2020.
2022.
Excuse
me
our
goal
now
is:
how
do
we
pull
all
of
those
20
issues
and
we've
already
started
calling?
If,
if
you
all
recall,
we
did
work
all
of
march
and
april,
but
it
doesn't
mean
that
it
eradicates
all
of
march
and
april.
You
could
have
initially
started
your
claim.
There.
F
F
So
as
many
of
those
like
issues
that
we
can
resolve
we're
trying
to
get
those
moved
and
we
have
a
requirement
by
law
to
analytically
look
through
all
of
those.
But
if
there
are
like
issues-
and
we
can
agree
to
those
issues,
we
can
create
a
script
for
the
the
system
to
go
in
and
put
to
a
closure
once
that
is
put
to
a
closure.
That
gives
that
individual
determination,
a
decision
and
it
allows
them
to
appeal
if
they
want
to
that's
their
right.
K
F
A
week-
and
I
know
senator
alvarado
asked
this
about
two
meetings
ago:
how
many
more
staff
do
you
you
need
of
that?
That's
what
we
represented
to
secretary
link.
F
F
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
If
you
indulge
me,
I
know
you
find
it
amazing,
but
I
have
several
questions
thanks.
Thank
you,
guys,
secretary
link
in
follow-up
on
september,
28
meetings.
You
confirm
that
the
kentucky
courier
centers
kcc's
are
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
labor
cabinet
and
not
the
education
workforce
development
cabinet.
It
is
my
understanding
that
kcc's
are
mandated
under
the
workforce.
Innovation
opportunity
act.
That
program
actually
remain
in
ewdc.
G
E
The
career
development
office
was
reorganized,
I
believe,
last
august
august
of
2020
and
came
under
the
kentucky
labor
cabinet
within
those
kentucky
career
centers.
There
are
multiple
functions
that
are
performed
there.
One
of
those
is
the
workforce
innovation,
which
is,
we
call
wioa
w-I-o-a,
that
is
cont,
that
is
still
managed
by
the
education
workforce.
Development
cabinet,
however,
in
those
centers,
are
also
unemployment,
insurance
assistance,
as
well
as
the
wagner
paiser
services
that
are
managed
by
the
career
development
office
and
the
kentucky
labor
cabinet.
E
So
when
that
that
unemployment
insurance
claim
walks
into
those
career
centers
and
they
file
their
claim,
we
want
to
push
them
into
the
wagner
piser
services
for
training
or
into
the
wioa
services
for
training
and
re-employment,
we're
also
working
with
local
employers
in
those
regions
to
marry
those
those
unemployment,
insurance
claimants
with
potential
job
opportunities,
if
they're
not
trained
for
those
job
opportunities,
that's
where
wagner
paiser
and
wioa
come
into
play.
So
it's
a
holistic
approach
that
these
centers
should
be
one-stop
shops.
If
you
will
to
get
people
back
into
the
workforce
and
re-employed.
G
Mr
thank
you,
sir.
When
labor
or
ui
receives
a
complaint
complaint
reports,
monitoring
reports
or
audits
from
the
federal
government
where
these,
where
do
these
reports
go?
Are
they
available
for
pub
for
for
public
view
on
a
website,
or
do
we
have
to
do
open
records
request
to
see
them.
E
I
may
ask
my
colleagues
for
assistance
what
I
can
tell
you
to
my
personal
knowledge.
We
are
meeting
with
the
u.s
department
of
labor
on
a
bi-weekly
basis
from
a
governance
level,
deputy
secretary
mary,
pat
regan,
from
education,
workforce
development
and
myself
meet
with
the
the
leadership
of
the
region,
3
staff
from
the
us
department
of
labor
on
a
bi-weekly
basis
to
address
any
and
all
issues
that
we're
facing,
and
then
there
are
subgroups
that
are
meeting
with
usdol
to
address
more
targeted,
specific
issues.
E
E
Regarding
the
transparency,
it's
certainly
public
record
I'll
have
to
get
back
to
you
on
what
the
mechanics
of
that
is
whether
it
would
require
a
freedom
of
information
act,
request
through
the
federal
government,
a
kentucky
open
records
request,
or
we
certainly
are
continuing
to
look
at
how
we
can
take
more
transparency
measures
and
get
those
available
through,
like
the
dashboard
that
director
hoskinson
talked
about
to
have
that
information
there
for
anybody
to
see
so,
basically,
right.
B
Representative,
I
I
believe
the
answer
to
your
question
is
because
it's
work,
product
of
whatever
agency
is
issuing
the
audit
results.
You
would
go
through
that
agency,
not
necessarily
our
cabinet.
However,
we're
happy
to
provide
you
with
that
answer.
You
know,
for
instance,
if
you,
if
it
was
a
usdol
audit,
that's
their
work
product,
so
you
would
have
to
go
to
them.
For
the
audit
report,
we're
we're
happy
to
look
into
that
and
see.
B
G
Problem
with
someone
like
me,
who's
outside
looking
in
there's
too
many
steps
to
find
to
find
out
what
is
going
on
and
that's
that's
what
I'm
saying
is:
let's
make
it
simplistic
here:
let's,
let's
make
it
transparent?
Let's
let
people
see
what's
actually
going
on
here.
We
agree.
Yes,
sir,
since
march
2000
you
have
ui
units
have
been
performed
in
non-merit
state
employees.
Was
there
a
federal
waiver
for
this?
Is
this
still
going
on.
F
So
we
did
have
in
the
first
part
of
the
pandemic.
The
federal
legislation
did
give
us
federal
guidelines
gave
us
flexibility,
a
waiver
for
that
that
ended
on
september,
the
4th
over
labor
day
weekend.
They
have
not
extended
that
states
have
asked
for
that,
but
that
has
not
been
extended.
So
what
happens?
F
Is
everybody
who
was
not
considered
married
in
the
state
of
kentucky
as
a
either
a
married
or
fftl
can
no
longer
do
any
functions
other
than
administrative
work,
so
they're
no
longer
doing
those
they're
no
longer
allowed
to
do
those
by
the
federal
government.
G
Okay,
all
right-
and
I
know
I
know
what
the
answer
is
going
to
be,
but
I'm
going
to
ask
it
again
what
happened
to
the
37
state
employees
who
fraudulently
filed
ui
benefits,
benefits
worth
approximately
117
000
and
what
protocols
are
being
put
in
place
to
prevent
this
happening
and
we're
going
to
talk
about
this
a
little
bit
more.
None
were
prosecuted,
one
was
fired,
eight
were
briefly
suspended
and
then
returned
to
their
jobs.
G
I
can
tell
you
as
a
business
owner.
I
have
policy
procedures
in
place.
That
says
you
still
you're
fired.
How
in
god's
name
was
this
allowed
to
come
happen?
What
have
you
done
to
stop
this
and
how
do
we
allow
people
to
still
basically
do
fraudulent
things
and
still
be
employed
for
the
state
they
stole
money
from
taxpayers
and
now
they're
still
getting
paid
by
taxpayers?
How
did
this
happen.
C
G
B
G
Well,
actually,
there
was
a
comment
by
the
judge
which
I
probably
need
to
talk
about.
Cleveland
said
when
the
governor
came
and
said:
we're
not
going
to
have
to
pay
the
money
back
cleveland
said,
then
I'm
thinking
well.
So
what
am
I
doing
here?
This
is
really
worth
my
time
when
I've
got
murder
and
robbery
cases.
There
are
a
few
of
them
that
were
clearly
the
people
knew
what
they
were
doing
and
was
clearly
fraud.
G
Cleveland
said,
but
given
the
sums
in
question
and
the
fact
that
the
governor
wasn't
pursuing
it,
I
just
couldn't
consider
it
the
best
use
of
my
time
to
prosecute
them.
How?
How
can
we
allow
these
people
off?
I
mean
that
they
have
stolen
money
from
taxpayers
and
they're
still
working
getting
paid
by
taxpayers.
President.
E
Pratt
we
have
our
general
counsel
here,
because
we
assume
this
question
could
come
up
yes
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
answer
it
as
appropriately
as
we
can
within
the
law,
because
I
don't
want
to
talk
to
mr
cleveland.
D
Yes,
my
name
is
sam
flynn,
I'm
general
counsel
and
inspector
general
for
the
labor
cabinet
and
representative
pratt.
I
do
want
to
go
back
to
a
question
you
asked
earlier
about
the
kcc's
before
I
answer
your
question.
The
general
assembly
moved
the
kcc
to
the
purview
of
the
labor
cabinet.
I
believe
it
was
this
this
session
and
that's
codified
at
336.045..
D
So
as
to
your
question,
the
kentucky
labor
cabinet
received
inspector
general
report
from
the
transportation
office
of
inspector
general
in
february
of
2021.
That
investigation
was
called
by
the
governor
and
the
lieutenant
governor
in
may
of
2020
of
the
individuals.
There
were
34
that
were
named
in
the
inspector
general's
report.
D
Sorry
35
that
were
named
in
the
inspector
general's
report.
31
of
those
individuals
were
interviewed.
Four
of
them
were
not
the
four
that
were
not
of
of
those.
Three
of
them
were
determined
that
they
had
not
filed
an
unemployment
insurance
claim.
One
of
those
individuals
no
longer
was
in
state
government
and
had
filed
a
claim,
but
obviously
not
during
their
time
in
state
government
of
the
remaining
individuals
17.
D
D
As
you
had
mentioned,
one
of
the
individuals-
and
this
was
the
only
individual
that
looked
at
their
own
claim
and
actually
got
in-
and
what
I
would
say
is
took
action
with
respect
to
their
own
claim.
In
this
case,
they
put
a
stop
on
their
claim,
so
they
could
not
be
paid
that
individual
was
dismissed
from
state
service.
D
The
remainder
of
those
individuals
were
reviewed
for
any
appropriate
personnel
action.
The
individuals
that
were
disciplined
several
of
them
were
disciplined
because
they
had
filed
a
claim,
had
access
to
the
ui
system
and
looked
at
their
own
claim,
or
looked
at
the
claims
of
other
individuals
with
respect
to
individuals
who
filed
a
claim
and
if
you
believe
representative
pratt
that
they
were
not
entitled
to
unemployment
insurance
benefits.
D
Those
individuals
were
again
named
in
the
oig
report,
and
that
report
was
referred
to
the
auditor
of
public
accounts,
the
executive
branch
ethics
commission.
It
was
provided
to
the
commonwealth's
attorney's
office
and
was
provided
to
the
office
of
the
attorney
general,
as,
as
my
colleague,
miss
eaves
mentioned
no
prosecut.
Sorry,
no
prosecution
has
occurred
with
respect
to
those
individuals.
D
The
labor
cabinet
can
only
refer
the
matter
to
a
criminal
prosecutor.
We
cannot
take
any
action
to
require
that
prosecutor
to
then
prosecute
individuals.
Okay,
the
prosecutor
has
to
determine
that
there
is
enough
evidence
that
these
individuals
actually
intended
to
defraud
the
unemployment
insurance
system.
G
Okay
and
one
thing
you
said
they
looked
at
their
own
records,
which
I
remember
correctly
from
otter,
harmon's
report
was
you're
not
allowed
to
look
at
your
own
claimant.
That's
actually
so
they
broke.
They
broke
one
of
the
policies
right
there,
but
I
guess
what
my
question
is:
not
whether
or
not
they
were
prosecuted
is
how,
in
god's
little
green
acres,
can
we
have
people
stealing,
but
so
I
need
to
go.
Tell
the
state
employees
go.
Take
things
out
of
your
office.
Take
them
home.
There's
no
consequences
for
this.
G
D
Representative,
I
I
appreciate
your
your
question
and
I
I
think
you
you
may
be
confusing
the
issue
a
little
bit
by
saying
that
individuals
stole
from
the
state
individuals,
filed
claims
and-
and
so
and
let's
take
this
out
of
the
context
of
oui.
D
For
the
moment,
let's
say
a
state
employee
that
works
in
in
pike,
county
files,
an
unemployment
insurance
claim,
in
this
case,
based
on
the
federal
program
related
to
a
secondary
job.
Let's
say
that
they're
they're
a
bartender
in
a
second
job
that
individual
could
be
filing
in
good
faith
based
on
the
loss
of
income,
because
that
bar
was
closed
during
the
pandemic.
D
Okay,
it's
a
very
brand,
very
brand
new
federal
system
that
was
enacted
in
I
believe
it
was
march
30
of
2020.,
so
brand
new
federal
programs,
brand
new
requirements
and
also
with
respect
to
the
pandemic
unemployment
assistance
program.
It
allowed
greater
flexibility
for
individuals
who
did
have
full-time
jobs
to
be
able
to
file
on
a
part-time
job,
so
individuals
that
work
in
state
government
or
work
in
a
private
business
that
have
secondary
jobs
could
have
in
good
faith,
filed
on
a
part-time
job
and
received
benefits
that
was
allowed
under
the
federal
system.
D
Okay,
so
with
when
you're
talking
about
individuals
who
filed
that
work
in
state
government,
those
individuals-
yes,
they
may
have
had
a
full-time
job,
but
could
have
filed
in
good
faith
on
a
part-time
job
that
they
had.
In
addition,
as
I
mentioned
before,
many
of
the
individuals,
in
fact
all
well,
in
fact,
all
the
individuals
that
filed
here
filed
some
of
them
may
have
not
been
in
good
faith.
Some
of
them
may
have,
however,
those
individuals
filed
and
were
paid
as
a
result
of
the
auto
pay
and
only
17
of
the
31
were
paid.
G
Well
again,
there
were
some:
there
were
some
consequences
for
the
employees.
I've
got
two
that
will
spend
it
for
one
day
if
my
math
is
correct,
four
that
was
spended
for
three
days:
five
that
were
suspended
for
five
days
and
actually
the
one
state
employee
you
said,
was
fired
because
consequences
said
issues
unrelated
to
an
investigation,
included
improper
use
of
a
state
vehicle
speeding
up
to
100
to
91
miles
per
hour
in
the
state
vehicle
filing
false
timesheets
and
having
inappropriate
materials
on
his
state
computer.
D
Individual
representative
again
was
dismissed
as
a
result
of
actions
unrelated
to
the
oig.
G
D
The
individual
who
I
referred
to
earlier,
who
was
dismissed
because
was,
was
dismissed.
G
They
filed
fraudulently
guys,
I'm
extremely
concerned
that
we're
setting
a
very
bad
message
to
people.
I
can
tell
you
at
pratt's
line
landscape.
You
use
my
company
material
or
take
something
it
states
very
pop.
Plainly
in
my
positive
procedure
manual,
you
will
be
terminated,
it's
not
you
could
be.
You
will
be
terminated.
G
D
Representative,
I
I
I
do
want
to
address
your
your
comment
briefly.
I
think
I
think
we're
conflating
two
two
separate
things:
the
first,
the
first
being
individuals
that
that
may
or
may
not
have
looked
at
at
their
own
claim,
those
those
are
obviously
a
matter
of
policy
within
the
office
of
unemployment,
insurance
and
certain
certain
statutes
and
regulations
that
we
have
as
well
as
federal
guidance.
That
says
you.
Obviously
you
cannot
look
at
your
own
claim
those
individuals
that
did
look
at
their
own
claim.
D
Those
individuals
were
disciplined
with
respect
to
the
secondary
issue.
The
secondary
issue
is
individuals
who
filed
a
claim
that
worked
in
state
government
and
and
may
or
may
not
have
filed
in
in
good
faith
or
bad
faith.
The
individuals
that
filed
in
bad
faith
again
this
report
was
referred
to
the
appropriate
law
enforcement
agencies
for
further
investigation,
if
necessary,
and
any
appropriate
criminal
action
against
those
individuals
that
was
that
was
done
by
by
our
office.
D
No
to
my
knowledge,
no
further
criminal
investigation
or
prosecution
is
ongoing
at
this
point,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
very
clear
that
those
are
two
separate
things.
E
G
Okay,
again,
I
think
we're
going
to
agree
to
disagree
on
the
fact
that
we
allow
these
people
to
gain
the
system
and
they're
still
employed,
and
I
think
some
of
them
looking
at
the
open
record
requests,
we
got
clearly
knew
they
weren't
allowed
to
do.
This
clearly
knew
they
were
stepping
outside
the
bounds.
Anybody
has
a
full-time
job
and
files
unemployment
benefits
on
a
part-time
job.
D
By
the
federal,
that's
that's
a
federal
program
that
was
passed,
I
believe
march
30
of
2020
and
signed
by
president
trump.
G
Interesting,
okay
again,
I
I'm
stream
extremely
concerned
with
the
fact
lack
of
discipline
for
these
employees.
So
thank
you
guys
appreciate
your
time
on
this,
but
I
got
more
questions.
I
know
you
guys
find
that
hit
me
all
right
exactly
what
do
claimants
have
to
do
fill
each
job
search
requirement,
and
my
question
is
years
ago
I
was
talking
some
people
used
to
draw
unemployment
now
you're
down
to
one
contact
a
week.
It
used
to
be
three:
why?
Why
not?
Three
again,
why
would
why
wait
one.
F
So
you're
right,
we
have
one
contact
per
week
and
that
has
been
that
way
for
probably
at
least
12
years
with
that
having
to
do
one
search,
I
think
what
your
what
we
talked
about
earlier
today
is:
what
is
that
activity
we've
talked
about,
and
I
think
mr
horvath
has
mentioned
too.
Other
states
may
be
doing
kentucky
being
one
of
the
lowest
numbers
that
you
heard
from
before
to
some
doing
five,
but
again
it's
what
are
those
valid
activities
that
can
be
validated
and
or-
and
I
think
to
his
words
also
can
be
proved.
F
I
think
that's
something
that
we
have
to
work
together
as
a
group
and
determine
how
are
we
going
to
tackle
that
with
the
resources
we
have
in
order
to
to
validate
that?
So
if
you
have
someone-
and
I
think
we've
talked
about
that
before-
how
do
I
validate
what
you've
reported
as
a
good
employer,
and
I
get
something
opposite
from
the
individual
that
you're
reporting
we
then
have
to
validate
and
determine
what
is
the
credible
answer
and
again
that
all
is
appealable.
E
And
I
think
this
goes
back
to
a
factor
of
resources
it
it
takes
people
to
investigate
whether
that's
a
valid
issue
or
not,
and
we
try
to
do
the
best
we
can
with
the
resources
we
do
have.
G
Well,
I
can
tell
you,
I
asked
my
office
manager
point
blank.
Are
you
aware
that
when
someone
come
and
my
production
manager,
are
you
aware
that
when
someone
comes
in
and
applies
for
a
job
and
refuses
it
that
we
need
to
report
to
state
both
of
them
looked
at
me
in
out
and
said?
No
really,
I
said
we
are
required.
We're
supposed
to
be
turned
us
in
no
two
replies
was
a.
We
don't
have
time
for
this
b.
Why
the
state
asking
us
to
do
this?
G
Why
don't
they
reach
out
to
us,
but
the
fact
they
weren't
aware
of
it
lets
me
know
we're
not
getting
the
word
out
guys
make
no
doubt
about
it.
Employers
are
unaware.
This
is
part
of
the
requirement
and,
if
you're
truly
unemployed,
I
think
one
a
week
is
a
little
low.
Actually,
I
think
it's
really
low.
G
E
Representative
pratt,
if
you
have
questions
for
us,
feel
free
to
call
me
yeah
or
send
me
an
email
with
questions
you
have
and
we'll
respond.
K
D
Oh
wow,
that's
correct
in
an
acting
capacity.
Our
our
inspector
general
well
was
formerly
mike
wright
that
individual
left
to
go
to
another
cabinet
in
in
june
and
I'm
serving
in
an
acting
capacity.
D
I
I
I
would
have
to
ask
you
some
some
more
questions
about
what
you
consider
a
conflict.
Well,.
D
So
the
inspector
general
as
the
as
the
statutes
written
the
inspector
general
serves
as
the
executive
director
of
the
office
of
inspector
general,
which
is
in
the
office
of
the
secretary.
D
So
in
point
of
fact,
the
inspector
general
serves
at
the
behest
of
the
cabinet
secretary,
and
so
when
the
cabinet
secretary,
for
example,
might
ask
the
inspector
general
to
look
into
whatever
program
may
need
additional
review.
That
is
the
the
duty
of
the
inspector
general.
A
A
C
Oh
good,
thank
you
so
much
chairman
members
of
the
task
force,
I'm
kate,
shanks
senior
vice
president
of
public
affairs
for
the
kentucky
chamber,
and
I
had
planned
to
be
with
you
in
person
today,
but
unfortunately
I
cannot
be
there
in
person.
So
thank
you
so
much
chairman
for
allowing
me
to
present
via
zoom.
I
really
appreciate
that
because
we
do
have
some
important
recommendations
and
I
think
I'm
going
to
speak
a
little
bit
about
some
of
what
you
all
have
just
been
discussing
and
what
some
of
our
recommendations
are
on
those
issues.
C
So
I
think
it's
very
timely
for
us
to
present
this.
As
you
know,
chairman
members
of
the
task
force,
the
chamber
has
been
engaged
on
unemployment
insurance
reform
issues
for
a
while.
Now
we
started
on
this
a
few
years
before
the
pandemic
actually
hit
in
kentucky,
and
so
we
looked
at
some
legislation
and
supported
different
bills
so
that
we
could
make
reforms
to
the
system
and
then
the
pandemic
hit,
and
we
somewhat
transitioned
into
emergency
mode
or
crisis
mode
with
the
unemployment
insurance
system.
C
So
I
want
to
start
out
by
saying
thank
you
for
the
bold
actions
that
you
took
during
the
2021
legislative
session
to
deal
with
the
crisis
that
the
pandemic
created.
It
was
very
important
what
you
did
specifically
house
bill,
382
and
paying
off
the
federal
loan
that
kentucky
took
out
to
pay
benefits
was
significant.
C
We
started
at
the
the
pandemic
with
over
600
million
in
the
trust
fund.
C
We
ended
2019
with
about
620
million
in
the
trust
fund
and
that
was
quickly
spent
down,
and
then
we
had
to
take
out
a
loan
from
the
federal
government,
for
I
think
we
ended
up
around
500
million
from
that
loan
paying
off
that
loan
was
significant
because
it
avoids
interest
and
penalties
on
employers,
and
it
helps
us
build
back
that
trust
fund
faster,
and
so
that
was
very
important
and
we
greatly
appreciate
it
house
bill
413,
chairman
freezing
the
ui
tax
was
significant
as
well.
We
supported
that.
C
We
appreciated
that
we
were
looking
at
moving
from
schedule
a
to
schedule
e
essentially
overnight
because
of
the
health
of
the
trust
fund,
and
that
would
have
amounted
to
on
average,
a
hundred
dollars
for
employee
tax
increase
because
of
that
tax
code
change,
so
freezing
it
at
schedule.
A
I
think
was
really
important
to
really
stop
the
bleeding
and
the
hits
to
employers,
as
we
were
in
the
in
the
midst
of
the
pandemic
and
some
of
the
worst
of
the
pandemic.
And
then
it
was
mentioned
senate
bill
7
and
the
the
waiver.
C
But
there
were
also
provisions
in
that
bill.
Dealing
with
fraud
and
making
sure
that
the
new
ui
system
would
address
some
of
those
fraud
issues
and
I'm
happy
to
report.
This
is
not
a
data
point,
but
just
anecdotally
the
numbers
of
calls
and
emails
that
we
had
been
getting
in
about
fraud
and
what
to
do
about
fraudulent
claims
have
greatly
slowed.
It
has
been
a
while,
since
I
have
gotten
one
of
those
calls
or
emails.
C
So
hopefully,
we've
reversed
those
trends
and
are
on
the
right
track
with
some
of
that
and
are
very
eager
to
see
what
can
be
done
with
the
new
system
as
well,
and
then,
of
course,
this
task
force,
I
think,
is
important
and
keeping
a
spotlight
on
these
issues
and
making
sure
we're
making
additional
reforms
going
forward.
So
I'm
going
to
focus
for
a
bit
on
the
trust
fund.
You've
heard
me
talk
about
this
quite
a
bit,
especially
this
time
last
year,
and
we
aren't
quite
where
we
were
at
the
start
of
the
pandemic.
C
So
based
on
on
some
of
our
our
numbers,
I
think
we're
around
300
million
or
so
in
the
trust
fund.
I
know
that
number
fluctuates
as
benefits
are
paid
out
and
as
tax
revenues
come
in
from
employers,
and
if
you
think
that
we
were
about
you
know,
600
million
at
the
start
of
the
pandemic,
maybe
even
a
little
bit
higher.
We
still
have
about
a
300
million
dollar
gap
there.
C
So
we
do.
We
do
request
that
you
consider
additional
funds
for
the
trust
fund
to
get
us
back
to
where
we
were
before
the
pandemic
hit,
and
potentially
this
could
be
federal,
arpa
funds,
some
other
funds
that
are
available,
but
we
think
it's
really
important
to
get
us
back
to
that
number.
For
a
couple
of
reasons.
What
we
ultimately
want
to
see
with
the
trust
fund
is
that
we
get
to
something
called
trust
fund
adequacy
and
specifically,
like
a
solvency
level,
that
the
us
department
of
labor
labor
identifies
is
healthy
for
a
trust
fund.
C
We're
about.
We
were
about
57
of
the
way
there
before
the
pandemic
hit,
and
we
had
been
crawling
out
of
a
hole
from
the
great
recession.
So
if
we
can
get
back
to
pre-pandemic
levels
quickly,
then
employers
as
they're
paying
in
taxes,
can
build
back
up.
That
trust
fund
to
get
us
to
that
trust,
fund
adequacy
level,
and
when
that
happens,
we
have
the
lowest
taxes.
C
In
some
cases,
I
believe
some
employers
wouldn't
even
have
to
to
pay
in
and
then,
if
there
is
a
downturn
in
the
economy,
we
don't
have
to
pay
interest
if
we
have
to
take
out
a
loan.
So
there's
a
lot
of
benefits
to
being
at
that
level,
and
it's
not
unlike
thinking
about
a
budget
reserve
trust
fund
and
that
having
those
funds
available
when
there
is
a
downturn
and
making
sure
that
we
can,
we
can
provide
those
benefits.
We
haven't
been
at
trust
fund
adequacy.
C
I
believe,
since
the
70s,
and
really
only
one
state,
pennsylvania
has
had
a
longer
duration
of
not
being
at
that
level
than
kentucky.
So
that
is
one
of
our
goals
and
I
think
getting
us
back
to
those
pre-pandemic
levels
that
that
employers
can
continue
to
pay
in
through
revenues.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
important.
C
We
also
have
a
long
history
and
some
of
these
bills
are
mentioned.
I
think
senator
nemes
mentioned
a
couple
of
these.
We
worked
on
in
2018
house
bill
252,
which
created
the
service
capacity
upgrade
fund,
and
we
supported
that
bill
to
siphon
a
little
bit
of
money
away
from
the
trust
fund
into
this
special
fund,
so
that
we
could
rebuild
the
system
and
improve
the
technology
of
the
system.
C
We
also
chairman
weber,
worked
with
you
on
house
bill
317
in
2019,
co-chair
nebus
when
you
were
at
the
cabinet,
and
so
this
is
legislation
that
looked
at
some
of
the
benefit
changes
the
duration
of
weeks
and
this
concept.
We
had
that
if
you're
going
to
be
getting
a
payment,
the
same
payment
every
week,
while
you're
on
unemployment,
would
it
be
helpful
to
get
a
little
bit
more
in
the
first
few
weeks
and
then
have
it.
C
Taper
down
to
encourage
you
to
get
into
re-employment
more
quickly,
and
so
we
think
that
this
legislation
is
something
that
warrants
additional
discussion
and
we're
happy
to
continue
to
explore
that
going
forward.
But
I
do
want
to
highlight
a
couple
of
new
recommendations
in
addition
to
all
of
these
and
the
first
one,
unfortunately,
don't
have
details
yet
on
this
particular
recommendation.
But
I
will
get
you
the
details.
C
Our
unemployment,
insurance
tax
framework
could
use
some
improvements
and
I
know
we
worked
on
the
tax
schedule
last
year
and
freezing
it
at
schedule
a
and
we
we
think
that
there's
probably
more
work
that
we
can
do
here
to
improve
the
tax
structure.
C
We
have
brought
in
the
tax
foundation,
which
is
a
national
nonpartisan
organization
that
works
with
states
to
improve
business,
tax
competitiveness,
and
so,
in
addition
to
looking
at
things
like
corporate
tax
and
llet
and
property
tax
and
inventory
tax
income
tax,
they
also
look
at
the
state's
unemployment
insurance
tax
structure.
You
don't
hear
a
lot
about
this,
but
in
kentucky
we
are
ranked
49th
in
the
nation,
so
we
do
believe
that
there
are
going
to
be
some
improvements
that,
but
we
know
that
they're
going
to
be
recommend
recommending.
C
But
the
fact
that
we're
49th
in
the
nation,
I
think
we
can
make
some
improvements
here
and
then
the
remainder
of
my
recommendations
today
are
around
the
work
search
requirement.
So
I'm
happy
that
we
we've
started
having
this
discussion
and
representative
pratt,
I'm
going
to
talk
about
some
things
that
I
think
you're
going
to
be
really
interested
in,
but
just
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
context
here.
As
you
all
know,
the
kentucky
chamber
has
been
focused
on
our
workforce
challenges
and
you,
you
know
these
challenges
as
small
business
owners.
C
You've
experienced
them
as
consumers
you've
experienced
them.
We
published
our
report
20
years
in
the
making
kentucky's
workforce
crisis
a
few
weeks
ago.
We
have
testified
before
committee
on
this.
You
should
all
have
a
copy
of
this
report
and
what
we
have
seen
over
the
last
two
decades
is
the
trend
in
workforce
participation
moving
in
the
wrong
direction.
We
have
dropped
from
63.5
percent
in
january
of
2000
all
the
way
down
to
56.4
percent,
we're
moving
in
the
wrong
direction
here
and
just
a
reminder.
Workforce
participation
is
the
percentage
of
our
working
population.
C
That
is
either
working
or
is
looking
for
work,
and
so
what
we've
seen
is
that,
in
addition
to
those
troubling
trends,
is
that
we
typically
trail
the
nation
on
average
by
four
percentage
points,
and
then
we
also
compared
to
other
states.
We
don't
do
well.
We
have
the
third
worst
workforce
participation
rate
in
the
nation.
C
I
don't
believe
these
numbers
and
statistics
are
probably
new
and
you've
heard
these
you've
heard
us
testify
to
these.
If
we're
talking
to
the
media
or
presenting
any
information,
we
are
talking
about
our
workforce
challenges
and
we
know
that
there's
a
variety
of
reasons
for
these,
but
in
addition
to
all
of
those
reasons,
we
look
at
the
unemployment
insurance
system
in
our
report
and
what
we
have
found,
and
I
think
these
numbers
are
pretty
troubling
and
these
numbers
are
not
new.
C
They
they're
they're
from
2019
before
the
pandemic,
but
in
2019
the
national
average,
for
how
long
someone
who
is
unemployed
receives
unemployment
benefits
was
14.8
weeks
for
states
that
surround
kentucky.
It
was
13.3
and
in
kentucky
we
were
at
18.2
weeks
as
that
average.
This
was
the
longest
average
benefit
duration
in
the
country.
C
So
I
think
we
have
some
work
to
do
here
and
what
we
are
focusing
on
is
what
we
can
do
to
help
kentuckians
become
re-employed.
Those
work
search
requirements
are
not
new
they've
been
around
since
the
30s.
All
states
have
them,
but
they
are
not
all
the
same
across
the
states
and
under
our
current
system.
C
As
was
already
discussed
you,
the
claimant
is
required
to
submit
one
job
contact
per
weight
per
week
when
making
their
bi-weekly
benefit
requests
and
they're
also
required
to
search
for
suitable
work.
That's
comparable
to
a
previous
job
terms
of
skills,
experience
and
wages,
and
there
are
exemptions
to
this,
such
as,
if
you
have
a
definite
recall
date,
so
we
have
several
recommendations
related
to
work
search.
C
The
first
one
is
the
notion
of
job
contact.
We
think
that
this
needs
to
be
redefined
as
work
search
activities,
and
then
we
think
we
need
to
define
work
search
activities
very
broadly
to
reflect
what
intel,
what
is
involved
in
a
modern
day,
work
search.
So
some
things
like
formally
submitting
a
job
application,
either
online
or
in
person
being
interviewed
virtually
in
person
or
in
a
group
setting
job
shadowing
attending
a
job,
fair
or
network,
potentially
hosted
by
a
local
chamber
or
some
other
business
association
participating
in
job
search,
skills,
workshops
and
seminars.
C
We're
seeing
this
in
other
states
where
there
are
virtual
virtual
seminars
that
people
can
participate
in
as
one
of
their
work
search
requirements
and
then
participating
in
official
career
center
or
partner
programs
related
to
job
search.
We
think
that
this
is
something
that
could
be
really
helpful
for
people
to
not
only
find
jobs
but
to
improve
their
work
search
skills
as
well,
and
then,
in
addition
to
that
in
representative
pratt,
you
mentioned
this
number
as
well.
C
We
think
again,
the
one
the
one
job
contact
per
week
is
a
fairly
weak
goal
for
a
modern
day,
job
search.
We
also
think
that
we
need
to
look
at
the
definition
of
suitable
work
under
state
law.
The
cabinet
must
consider
various
criteria
in
determining
what
is
or
is
not
suitable.
This
includes
their
previous
wages,
employment,
history,
background
and
skills
in
other
states.
The
definition
of
suitable
work
will
change
the
longer.
C
So
many
employers
today
are
willing
to
do
on-the-job,
training
and
even
support
that
skill
development
as
well,
and
so
we
think
that
the
changing
that
definition
and
making
it
more
useful
will
help
and
then
also
we
talked.
I
think
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
focus.
I
heard
the
cabinet
talk
about
focus,
but
we
think
a
very
robust
job
referral
program
is
going
to
be
so
important
and
I'll
point
out.
C
South
carolina
has
a
great
program,
one
of
the
things
that
they
do
is
they
actually
pair
jobs
with
claimants
by
region,
and
so
they
know
the
claimant
skill
set
and
what
their
experience
is.
And
then
they
know
what
the
job
entails
and
they
can
actually
match
them
and
they're
sending
out
numerous
emails
to
claimants
so
that
they're
actually
getting
those
jobs
that
they
can
then
go
and
apply
for,
and
I
think
that
this
could
be
really
useful
and
what
we
have
found
at
the
chamber.
C
We
initiated
a
program
called
who's
hiring
at
the
start
of
the
pandemic
and
over
the
last
year
and
a
half
we've
seen
over
100
000
jobs
processed
through
who's,
hiring
employers
will
get
in
there
and
we'll
upload
their
jobs.
And
then
people
will
search
for
jobs
through
this
system,
and
we
we
decided
that
it's
really
great.
It's
such
a
great
system.
C
We
want
it
to
be
sustainable,
and
so
we
have
rebranded
it
as
talent
hub
and
it's
a
searchable
portal,
where
you
can
search
by
region
by
sector
of
the
economy,
even
if
you're
looking
for
a
fair
chance
or
second
employee
second
chance
employer,
you
can
search
for
all
of
that.
And
so
perhaps
there
are
ways,
if
not
through
through
our
programs,
to
the
kentucky
chamber
foundation,
but
through
other
associations
or
other
types
of
products
that
can
be
purchased
off
the
shelf.
C
Perhaps
there
are
ways
to
improve
the
robustness
of
the
job,
referral
program
and
kind
of
build
on.
Maybe
what
was
started
with
focus
and
we're
happy
to
continue
to
have
those
conversations
with
you
in
the
cabinet
as
well,
but
also,
we
think
that
the
cabinet
should
update
its
online
portal
for
employers
that
report
candidates
who
refuse
a
job
offer.
C
C
C
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
that
you
know
in
many
of
these
instances
we're
talking
about
resources
and
what
can
we
do
with
the
resources
available
and
what
could
we
do
with
additional
resources
and
perhaps
once
the
portal,
the
new
system
is
built
and
we're
happy
to
be
helpful
as
helpful
as
we
can
and
to
acknowledge
that
with
resources
that
we
have,
we
can
maybe
only
go
so
far,
but
we
do
think
it's
important
that
there
be
going
forward
this.
This
focus
on
work,
search
and
helping
people
find
jobs
and
become
re-employed
as
quickly
as
possible.
C
We're
going
to
be
coming
at
this
from
multiple
angles,
and
so
these
are
the
recommendations
that
we
have
chair
and
members
of
the
task
force
for
improving
the
workforce
piece
of
the
unemployment
insurance
system
in
kentucky
and
with
that
I'll,
stop
and
take
a
break
and
answer
any
questions
that
you
all
might
have.
A
J
I
know
that
currently
I
think
the
cabinet
has
two
individuals
who
are
actually
reviewing
as
far
as
the
application
process
to
make
sure
they're
doing
job
search,
and
so,
if
we're
gonna
increase
that
and
change
that,
I
would
think
that
we
would
have
to
put
considerable
resources
in
place
to
do
that,
and-
and
I
would
believe
that
the
I
guess
my
question
would
be-
would
the
chamber
support
that
you
know
kind
of
channel
the
resources
too
that
have
the
auditing
process,
but
also
making
sure
the
system's
built
out
in
a
way
that
it
complies?
J
You
know
doing
the
research
as
others,
but
again
I'm
thinking,
resources
and
money
and
time
and
and
so
for
the
past
couple
years,
that
most
of
our
phones
have
run
off
the
hook
because
of
the
issues
for
the
locker
resources,
because
the
system's
not
up
to
date,
and
so
I
guess
the
the
question
would
be
with
the
chamber
fully
support
the
making
sure
all
the
resources
are
there,
that
we
could
do
this,
and
I
guess
that
kind
of
putting
that
out
to
my
colleagues
that
we
all
shake
our
head.
J
Yes,
we
want
to
do
these
things,
but
in
order
for
them
to
be
accomplished
correctly,
we'll
have
to
pay
for
them,
and-
and
I
think
the
cabinet
would
need
substantial
resources
to
do
so,
and
I
just
if
you
could
do
a
comparison
of
some
of
the
other
best
practices
that
you've
looked
at,
whether
it's
north
carolina
or
western
good,
maybe
what
their
cost,
how
many
people
they
have
in
place
and
what
we
have
to
do
to
mirror
that.
Thank
you.
C
That's
an
excellent
question
and
I
appreciate
the
secretary's
reference
to
building
the
church
for
easter.
As
catholic
I
can.
I
can
relate
to
that
concept,
but
you
know
I,
I
think
the
resource
question
is
a
legitimate
one,
and
I
think
the
challenge
is
that,
as
I
mentioned,
we've
dealt
with
the
emergency
of
the
ui
system
because
of
this
pandemic
and
then
going
forward.
C
Well,
what's
the
system
look
like
and
what
do
we
need
to
be
sustainable
going
forward
and
I
will
point
back
to
those
2019
numbers
and
that
those
numbers
are
what
got
the
chamber
so
concerned
that
we
had
such
a
long
duration
spent
on
unemployment,
the
longest
in
the
nation?
And
so
I
I
think
our
position
on
work
search
is
really
it's
significant,
regardless
of
the
pandemic,
because
what
we're
focusing
on
now
are
some
sustainable
changes
that
we
can
make
going
forward
in
hopes
that
we
never
see
this
type
of
economic
hit
like
the
pandemic.
C
Again,
you
don't
you
don't
know,
but
we
know
there
will
be
a
downturn
at
some
point
in
the
future
for
the
resources
you
know
we're
we're
happy
to
to
focus
on
what
it
might
take
and
what
it
would
need
to
support
that
and
how
we
can
reshuffle,
potentially
resources
in
a
way
to
address
workforce
challenges
around
the
ui
system,
and
I
think
what
I
will
tell
you
on
behalf
of
the
business
community
is
this
is
such
a
an
important
issue
for
our
members
that
you
will
see
the
chamber
rolling
up
their
sleeves
on
our
workforce
challenges
for
now.
C
Until
you
know,
we
can
really
get
get
our
head
above
the
water.
I
mean
we,
we
are
in
a
very
difficult
situation,
and
so,
if
we
have
to
look
at
resources
and
potentially
how
we
can
put
those
resources
into
work
search
or
get
just
more
generally
getting
people
re-employed,
I
think
you'd
see
the
chamber
very
eager
to
support
that.
J
I
Yes,
kate.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
I
appreciate
the
specific
suggestions
and
not
some
broad
ideas
which
we
usually
hear
and
I'm
willing
to
work
with
you
once
again
on
the
bills
that
we
had
suggested
and
a
lot
of
things
that
we
need
to
do,
because
if
we
get
the
fund
up
to
snuff,
then
that's
a
whole
lot.
Less
unemployment
taxes
that
representative
patton
has
to
pay
and
all
the
businesses
in
kentucky
and
I'm
sure,
he'll
be
very
happy
with
that.
I
The
work
search
activity,
not
work
search,
I'm
totally
in
favor
of
that,
goes
with
training
and
education
and
that
because,
if
it's
just
the
work
search
as
we
do
now,
it's
a
total
use,
useless
time
time
spent
and
so
to
to
just
say
you
have
to
go
for
work
search
as
it's
defined
now,
5
10
15
a
week
as
opposed
to
one,
is,
in
my
opinion,
a
waste
of
time,
we'll
just
be
hiring
a
lot
of
people
to
check.
I
If
you
actually
did
that
or
not,
instead
of
actually
solving
the
problem,
so
I
really
like
changing
it
to
work
search
activity.
I
I
I
You
know
we
had
plenty
of
jobs
before
and
we'll
have
plenty
of
jobs
after
this
pandemic,
but
we
don't
have
the
skills
to
to
fill
them
so
with
what
we're
trying
to
do,
what
we
were
trying
to
do
and
the
secretary
was
saying,
they're
going
to
continue
this
or
kick
it
back
into
gear,
with
the
career
centers,
to
be
a
one-stop
shop,
to
get
your
skills,
education
and
training
for
the
jobs
that
are
available
now
and
that's
where
we
need
to
go
and
and
I'm
glad
that
it
seems
that
everyone
is
on
board.
I
With
that
now
senator
yates
brought
up
the
funding.
I
We
know
that
the
the
legislature
already
put
some
money
back
when
I
was
in
the
cabinet
for
the
computer
system
and
by
going
into
the
career
centers,
we
are
doing
we're
utilizing
a
lot
of
the
facilities
we
have
now,
instead
of
just
throwing
money
at
at
new
facilities
and
things.
So,
yes,
we
probably
need
to
hire
a
few
more
people
and
it
will
cost
a
little
more
money,
but
I
think
that
we
can
address
this
without
just
throwing
money
at
the
problem.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
G
Thanks,
sir
kate,
thank
you
thank
you
and
thank
everything.
The
chamber
does
for
all
businesses
across
state,
large
and
small
you're.
A
great
advocate
you're,
always
there
to
make
sure
that
we
get
our
voices
heard
and
you're
right.
I
you
know
we
do
need
to
work
on
this
and
I
think
something
we're
missing
here
is:
if
we
solve
the
workforce
participation
problem,
we
have
here
in
kentucky,
we
don't
need
the
unemployment
office
to
keep
expanding.
We
don't
need
hire,
keep
hiring
people,
I
mean
this
will
solve
itself.
C
So
the
talent
hub
portal
is
built
through
our
foundation,
and
you
know
I
can
get
you
more
information
on
on
the
the
source
of
that
and
it
was
built
based
on
the
needs
of
employers
in
our
members.
C
So
it
wasn't
designed
around
the
unemployment
insurance
system
and
it
you
know
it
exists
separate
from
that
and
it's
simply
a
resource
where
we
had
we
decided
during
the
pandemic.
When
you
know
we,
we
were
seeing
people
losing
their
jobs,
but
also
we
had
jobs
open
that
we
were
trying
to
say.
Okay
well,
if
you've
lost
your
job
recently
because
of
the
pandemic,
but
we
have
employers
that
have
positions
open.
We
just
want
to
bring
everybody
together.
C
C
I
think
it
would
be
interesting,
though,
if
at
one
point
in
the
future
it
was
able
to
do
that
through
the
new
portal
or
you
know,
through
some
other
system.
I
know
that
south
carolina
does
that
and
I
can
send
you
more
information
on
their
work
search
and
how
they
pair
people
with
jobs.
C
But
it's
a
there's,
a
technological
piece
that
makes
that
happen.
So
I'm
not
sure
how
we
would
go
about
doing
that.
But
I
you
know,
I
think
it'd
be
interesting
to
talk
about,
because
it's
it's
talent
hub
is
now
it's
here
to
stay.
It's
something
we're
going
to
continue
to
invest
in
from
the
chamber,
because
we
know
it's
something
that
our
members
benefit
from,
as
well
as
individuals.
Looking
for
jobs
and
again
it's
another
piece
of
that
workforce
equation
that
we're
trying
to
solve.
G
Yes,
and
thank
you
guys
for
putting
together
glad
you
guys
have
rolled
this
out,
but
it
would
be
great
if
we
could
get
to
work
together
so
that
we're
not
duplicating
services
and
we
can
get
people
back
working
here
in
the
state
of
kentucky
again
thank
the
chamber
for
everything
you
do
for
businesses,
small
and
large
across
kentucky.
Thank
you.
Ma'am.
A
Kate,
thank
you
for
coming
and
presenting
recommendations
for
this
committee
to
consider.
I
think,
since
march
of
2020,
the
one
thing
that
that
we've
seen
is
is
everything
that's
gone
on,
has
highlighted
the
need
for
us
to
take
a
deep
look
at
our
unemployment
insurance
system
in
this
state,
and
that
was
the
purpose
of
this
task
force
and
that's
what
we're
attempting
to
do
so.
I
want
to
thank
those
that
have
made
recommendations
today
and
in
the
past.
So
thank
you,
kate,
for
being
here.
A
We
now
will
move
to
our
last
presentation
for
the
day
joe
horvath
senior
fellow,
with
the
foundation
for
government
accountability.
If
you'll
come
forward
joe
prior
to
speaking
senator
alvarado
has
a
comment
that
he'd
like
to
make
after
he's
finished.
If
you'll
introduce
yourself
for
the
record,
and
then
you
may
begin
your
presentation
for
the
committee.
L
A
L
Chairman-
and
I
know
it's
often
when
we
get
into
a
lot
of
these
task
forces,
we
hear
a
lot
of
testimony.
It's
easy
to
get
lose
focus
a
bit.
I
did
ask
the
chairman
really
if
you
could
have
fga,
come
and
present
today,
so
I
would
encourage
all
members
really
to
listen
carefully
to
this
presentation.
I
think,
as
we're
looking
a
lot
of
our
focus
has
been
often
on
the
department
of
labor
how
things
have
been
handled.
I
know
I'm
looking
at
how
things
have
been
handled
in
the
past,
we're
critical
of
that.
L
There
are
a
lot
of
reforms
that
we
can
do
within
ui,
that's
going
to
make
it
more
sustainable,
and
that
makes
sense.
I
heard
a
bit
to
this
presentation
just
a
week
ago,
when
I
heard
it
I
reached
out
to
the
chairman
and
said
I
think
our
members
need
to
hear
this,
so
I
would
encourage
everybody
just
to
listen
up.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
common
sense
stuff.
That's
gonna
be
about
to
be
presented,
so,
mr
horvath,
if
you'd
like
please
thank
you.
Yeah.
H
Yes,
sir,
and
thank
you
for
the
invitation
again,
my
name
is
joe
horvath,
I'm
a
senior
fellow
with
the
foundation
for
government
accountability,
and
I
feel
like
I'm
already
starting
on
the
wrong
foot
here,
because
this
is
absolutely
not
a
101
group.
I
use
the
same
title
slide.
I
really
shouldn't
have
they
should
you
know
advanced
phd
level
so
good
morning,
first
I'd
like
to
thank
the
committee
for
allowing
me
to
speak
with
you
this
morning
and
over
the
past
18
months,
we've
learned
quite
a
bit.
H
H
So
all
in
all,
we
learned
that
our
systems
are
insolvent,
our
taxes
are
going
up
and
our
small
businesses
are
having
a
hard
time
hiring,
but
other
than
that,
mrs
lincoln.
How
was
the
play
so?
I'm
joe
horvath,
as
I
said,
I'm
a
senior
fellow
at
the
foundation
for
government
accountability,
which
is
a
non-profit
nonpartisan
organization,
dedicated
to
policies
that
reduce
dependency
and
improve
opportunity.
H
So
I'm
just
going
to
walk
you
really,
quick,
really
through
what
we're
going
to
do.
Some
of
this
is
going
to
be
basic,
but
first
I'm
going
to
talk
about
what
unemployment
is
and
what
it
is.
Not,
then,
we'll
briefly
talk
about
why
ui
policy
matters
beyond
just
the
program
itself
and
then
last
and
certainly
not
least,
we'll
get
to
why
we're
here,
three
steps
to
reforming
your
system.
H
H
H
It's
not
economic
development.
If
assistance
programs
drove
the
economy,
2020
would
have
been
a
much
better
year
for
america
and,
lastly,
it's
not
paid
for
by
workers.
It's
not
something.
People
are
getting
back,
what
they
paid
into
for,
because
they,
except
in
a
few
states,
they
don't
pay
in
anything.
So
now
we've
established
some
of
the
basics.
H
Why
does
it
matter?
Because
I've
heard
legislators
in
other
states,
not
this
one
say
things
like
well,
it's
run
by
the
governor
and
the
agency.
You
know
we
aren't
really
involved
in
that,
and
I
guarantee
you.
I
don't
see
anyone
here
who
would
agree
with
that,
so
why
does
it
matter?
Solvency,
the
representative
from
the
chamber,
you
guys
this
will
not
be
a
surprise
to
any
of
you.
H
The
health
of
your
trust
fund
matters
so
trust
fund
solvency
is
measured
on
a
50
state
and
territory
basis
by
the
federal
government
and
for
a
lot
of
states.
It's
looking
just
like
2009
and
kentucky's
no
exception
suffering
a
year-over-year
drawdown
of
more
than
590
million,
and
that
number
comes
from
the
annual
usdol
trust
fund
solvency
report
that
they
do
for
all
the
states
and
territories.
H
H
So
let's
talk
about
taxes
a
bit
in
addition
to
solvency,
the
federal
government
tracks,
unemployment,
taxes
among
the
states
and
doing
a
50-state
comparison.
Looking
at
employer
contribution
rates
kentucky
would
rank
27..
Now
this
is
not
to
contradict
the
49
ranking
that
tax
foundation
provided
to
the
chamber.
That's
absolutely
correct,
I
know
jared
over
there.
They
do
great
work,
so
we're
measuring
different
things.
So
to
say,
the
good
news
is
that,
for
average
contributions,
you're
mediocre.
H
Your
goal
as
lawmakers
should
be
three-fold,
solvent
system,
more
jobs
and
low
taxes,
and
guess
what
you
can
get
there
in
three
easy
steps.
One
benefit
reform
everything
flows
from
this.
If
you
design
your
benefits,
smartly
they're
gonna
help
you
these
next
two
fall
into
place
and
the
next
two
are
two
emphasizing
jobs.
H
H
H
H
This
idea
passed
the
missouri
house
last
year
as
a
matter
of
fact,
and
while
I'm
not
a
gambler,
if
I
was,
I
would
wager
that
it
passes
missouri
this
year
and
there's
also
legislation
that
is
being
looked
at
by
the
leadership
in
ohio,
west,
virginia
and
indiana.
For
the
upcoming
session
now
tennessee
may
be
the
newest
state
to
index,
but
I
wanted
to
start
with
the
best
example
florida.
H
The
results
were
so
remarkable
that
it
inspired
other
states
like
georgia
and
north
carolina.
So
what
happened?
Well,
let's
go
back
to
2011
the
tail
end
of
the
great
recession.
Florida's
trust
fund
was
broke.
People
were
on
unemployment
for
too
long
and
taxes
looked
like
they
were
going
up.
They
were
desperate
for
answers.
H
H
The
time
people
spent
on
unemployment
was
cut
in
half
they
went
down
to
less
than
10
weeks
on
average
and
because
people
were
spending
less
time
on
unemployment,
program
costs
went
down
and
because
program
costs
went
down
that
allowed
taxes
to
go
down.
70
percent-
and
you
know
I
know
what
you
might
be
thinking.
You
know,
of
course,
things
got
better
their
economy
improved.
H
H
The
federal
definition
of
unemployment
eligibility
is
able
to
work
available
to
work
and
actively
seeking
work.
What
does
that
mean?
It
just
means
you're
looking
for
work,
you're
looking
for
a
job,
so,
let's
make
sure
people
on
unemployment
are
actively
forging
their
path
back
to
work.
There's
a
few
good
ways
to
do
that
when
people
apply
for
unemployment,
make
sure
two
things
happen,
collect
the
proof
of
their
work,
search
or
work
search
activities
and
make
sure
that
the
labor
cabinet
is
actively
verifying
all
of
it.
H
Just
an
example
of
why
this
matters
and
why
it's
helpful.
There
was
a
study
done
in
utah
a
few
years
ago
to
see
whether
people
were
really
looking
for
work
when
people
were
asked
were
about
to
exhaust
benefits,
meaning
their
work
search,
wasn't
really
meaningful
or
effective.
The
state
asked
them
to
participate
in
job
search.
H
Also,
a
lot
of
states
have
pretty
long
lists
of
what
satisfies
work,
search,
activities
and
you've
heard
a
lot
about
that
already
this
morning.
I'll
give
you
some
examples
from
other
states
in
south
carolina.
All
you
have
to
do
is
look
at
a
job
posting
just
look
at
it
in
iowa.
If
you
update
your
resume
by
a
few
keystrokes
that
counts
in
some
states,
just
registering
for
just
registering
for
a
job
board
or
a
social
media
website
count
just
registering
not
using
those
aren't
good
enough.
H
That's
like
saying
you
need
to
go
to
the
gym
four
times
a
week,
but
then
putting
on
your
gym
shorts
counts
for
one
of
those
four
times,
so
you
should
make
it
simple
and
only
accept
activities
that
will
lead
directly
to
a
job.
So
a
good
list
is
south
dakota.
What
they
do
is
interviews
applications,
state-sponsored
training,
resea.
H
That
kind
of
thing
it's
a
short
list,
a
short,
effective,
verifiable
list
that
actually
leads
to
work
right,
because
it's
not
just
about
cutting
the
amount
of
things
that
count
it's
about
making
things
that
are
meaningful
count,
because
your
unemployment
system
only
works.
If
people
are
looking
for
work
so
help
them
look
for
work.
H
This
is
going
to
be
a
quick
one
because
you've
already
talked
about
it,
and
the
idea
is
very
simple
if
you
turn
down
a
job
in
general,
you're
no
longer
eligible
for
unemployment,
so
all
you
need
to
do
as
a
legislature
is
encourage
employers
to
report
it
and
make
sure
the
agency
enforces
it.
One
of
those
steps
is,
of
course,
building
a
more
robust
system
system
that
that
the
previous
speaker
from
the
chamber
mentioned.
H
So
that's
a
quick
one,
we'll
go
through
that.
She
also
mentioned
the
south
carolina
style,
job
referral
system,
and
I
could
not
be
more
pleased
that
she
brought
it
up
because
director
elsie's
doing
a
great
job
down
there.
It's
a
new
idea
that
was
created
in
response
to
covid
south
carolina
found
that
people
weren't
getting
back
to
work
fast
enough,
so
they
created
a
simple
solution:
they
had
employers,
advertising
jobs
and
they
had
unemployment,
claimants
looking
for
jobs,
they
just
connected
them.
H
H
This
idea
is
crucial
because
it
helps
people
who
need
help
and
it
motivates
people
who
need
motivation,
and
it
also
sounds
like
some
basic
infrastructure
is
already
built
in
this
state.
There's
activity
done
by
the
by
the
labor
cabinet
and
the
chamber
has
tools
so
to
some
degree.
Some
of
this
work
is
just
ready
to
be
put
together,
made
mandatory
and
codified,
and
now
the
last
three
of
these
steps
isn't
going
to
surprise
you,
so
that's
jobs.
H
Last
three
of
the
steps
is
not
going
to
surprise
you,
but
it's
important
protecting
your
system
and
I
suspect
all
of
you
here
would
agree
that
only
eligible
people
should
collect
benefits
and
well
I
hate
to
be
the
bearer
of
bad
news,
but
that's
not
what
that's
not
what's
been
happening.
The
past
18
months
or
even
18
years
in
most
cases
during
covid,
specifically
about
as
much
as
400
billion,
was
taken
with
some
estimates
saying
that
70
of
that
money
left
the
country
entirely.
H
But
thankfully
there
are
simple
popular
federally
recommended
reforms
sweeping
the
country-
and
we
have
kentucky
to
thank
for
a
lot
of
that.
You
were
the
first
state
to
pass
many
of
these
reforms
in
2021
these.
I
won't
go
through
them
because
you
know
them
because
you
did
them,
but
I
do
want
to
show
you
who
followed
your
lead.
If
you
look
at
this
map,
louisiana
did
in
a
special
session
a
couple
months
before
you.
You
were
the
first
to
do
it
in
a
regular
session
in
2021
and
after
that
west
virginia
ohio,
vermont
montana
kansas.
H
So
even
if
you're,
one
of
the
states
that
did
some
of
these
members,
there
are
more
measures.
There
are
more
newer
things
that
you
can
do
today.
That
just
makes
sense
identify
suspicious
cases.
During
coveted
professional
fraudsters
found
vulnerabilities
in
systems,
some
people
sent
claims
to
all
50
states
using
one
address
and
one
bank
account.
H
All
your
agency
has
to
do
is
identify
accounts
using
the
same
address
same
bank
account
same
ip
address
or
foreign
ip
addresses
and
weed
out
the
fraud
and,
of
course,
the
chain
the
cabinet
before
testified.
Much
to
this
effect,
multi-factor
authentication
is
another
thing
they
brought
up
because
identity
theft
there
was
a
huge
breach
in
kansas
in
kentucky
and
then
last,
but
I
think
this
is
certainly
not
least
this
one
punches
above
its
weight
when
someone
commits
fraud
take
them
out
of
the
system.
A
five-year
lockout
is
smart,
but
it's
also
fair.
H
H
It's
not
economic
development.
Good
unemployment
policy
isn't
easy,
but
it
is
simple.
I
promise
you
if
you
keep
your
state
system,
limited
to
its
actual
scope
and
follow
these
simple
reform
steps.
You
can
increase
solvency,
get
people
back
to
work
faster
and
make
your
state
an
easier
place
to
hire
workers,
and
if
I
could
just
go
ahead,
there
were
some
questions
that
brought
up,
I
think,
are
worth
mentioning.
H
Senator
yates,
you
mentioned
something
about
resources,
you're
not
here,
so
I
don't
know
where
to
look
but-
and
I
don't
know
the
extent
to
which
kentucky
has
spent
down
its
federal
money
provided
by
the
cove,
the
first
covert
relief
or
the
more
recent
one
under
president
biden,
but
federal
regulations
have
made
upgrading
your
systems,
both
general
welfare
unemployment
allowable
expenses.
For
that
money.
So
whatever
is
left,
you
can
contribute
to
those
kind
of
efforts
to
build
more
robust
systems
and
wanted
to
mention
the
work
share
program
that
the
cabinet
before
mentioned.
H
That's
not
policy.
That
fga
has
worked
on
a
lot,
but
I
will
say
generally
supportive
of
it.
It's
a
good
idea.
You
saw
the
number
of
states
that
did
it
the
last
two
did
it
in
response
to
covet
georgia
and
west
virginia
created,
legalized
work
share.
I
guess
is
one
way
to
look
at
it
and
made
it
part
of
their
systems,
because,
yes,
it's
in
some
cases,
it
means
people
are.
H
There
are
more
people
on
unemployment,
but
the
more
important
thing
is:
more
people
are
working
and
it's
a
voluntary
arrangement
with
the
employer
and
then
representative
pratt
talking.
We
had
the
conversation
about
public
employee
employees,
you
know
filing
for
benefits,
and
you
know
there
was
the
back
and
forth
about
whether
whether
you're
part-time
full-time,
it
was
allowable
under
the
federal
programs,
but
that's
kind
of
the
problem
right.
H
It's
not
intended
to
cure
all
ills
because
you
need
that
incentive
to
get
back
to
work
so
creating
a
system
out
of
nothing
sweeping
in
all
sorts
of
new
workers
that
were
never
eligible
before
it
created
stress
for
your
cabinet.
It
created
stress
for
your
agency,
it
created
stress
for
your
workforce.
H
I
think
it
was
the
wrong
way
to
do
it.
So
just
I
wasn't
going
to
bring
it
up,
but
there
is
a
bill
moving
through
the
ohio
legislature
right
now.
That
would
require
legislative
approval
for
participation
in
any
kind
of
programs
like
that
in
the
future.
So
I
just
it
came
up,
so
I
figured
I'd
just
mention
it
to
you.
There
was
just
a
hearing
on
it
yesterday.
Actually,
so
with
that,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
I
just
wanted
to
get
out
as
much
as
I
could.
C
A
Sir,
I
do
have
one
that
I
want
to
lead
off
with
what
is
what
what's
the
dollar
amount
for
solvency
for
the
state
of
kentucky
and
are
you
at
trust
fund?
Oh
right
now?
Well
so.
A
H
As
referenced
by
the
chamber
earlier,
they
use
a
ratio.
The
average
high
cost
multiple,
it's
a
breakdown,
the
most
simplest
way
I
can
what
they
do.
Is
they
look
at
your
average
expenditures
for
the
they
take
a
20-year
window
and
they
say
you
know
what
are
the
highest
three
spending
years
for
the
past
20
years
and
they
that's
one
part
of
the
factor.
H
They
list
all
50
states
and
all
the
territories,
and
they
say
how
close
are
you
and
the
chamber
was
right
to
say
that
kentucky
hasn't
hit
that
number
since
1976
and
you're
tied
with
ohio,
at
least
if
that
makes
you
feel
any
better
and
pennsylvania's
worse,
but
almost
no
states
have
a
track
record
like
that.
So
in
terms
of
raw
dollars,
I
couldn't
give
you
the
raw
dollar
amount,
but
that
average
high
cost
multiple
of
1.0
in
the
average
annual
report.
I
Yeah
before
the
pandemic
it
was
1.2
billion,
it
went
up
from
800
million
and
or
I
think
we
had
somewhere
around
800
million.
We
were
getting
close
to
that
and
we
were
very
happy
about
that,
because
then
the
taxes,
the
unemployment
tax
rates
for
the
employers
were
going
down
and
some
employers
were
it
was
going
to
be
zero.
I
So
we
were
real
happy
about
that.
Now
what
it
is
now
I
don't
know
if
they're
going
to
throw
that
pandemic
in
there
to
make
it
more
than
that,
but
right
before
the
pandemic
is
1.2
billion,
and
we
were
close
to
doing
that
with
the
legislature,
putting
some
of
the
covert
money
or
allotting
some
money
to
redo
the
fund.
I
think
that
will
help
to
get
us
that
back
up
to
that
part
quickly,.
H
Well
for
context
right
now:
usdol
has
you
at
a
zero
percent,
so
I
mean
improvement
is
needed
and
one
time
one
time,
investments
from
some
of
that
federal
dollars
are
helpful,
but
really
structural
reform.
It's
we've
seen
a
number
of
people
in
a
number
of
states.
Finally
get
to
the
point
where
we
need
to
this
thing
to
be
sort
of
built,
a
little
smarter
so
that
you
know
god
forbid,
there
will
be
a
future
downturn.
You
need
to
be
able
to
meet
that
too.
L
Senator
alvarado,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and,
and
this
all
intrigued
me
with
the
idea
of
indexing,
which
I
think
makes
complete
sense,
and
I
I've
been
reaching
out
to
some
folks
about
considering
preparing
something
to
you
know
propose
that
as
a
and
I'm
sure
our
our
task
force.
When
we
discuss
our
recommendations,
I
would
urge
members
to
really.
I
know
we've
been
talking
about
a
lot
of
other
things
as
far
as
modernizing
the
system
and
workforce.
L
This
will
be
one
of
the
bigger
things
we
could
do
really
to
improve
ui
in
the
state
to
make
it
sustainable
to
make
it
better
across
the
board.
So
I
would
encourage
all
members
when
the
time
comes
to
that
discussion,
to
include
that,
but
how
many,
how
many
states
total
have
implemented
indexing?
Have
they
all
seen
the
same
kinds
of
results
that
we've
seen
in
florida
and
and
is
there
any
resistance,
or
you
know
what
I'm
sure
there's
always
somebody
in
opposition
to
something
that
you
propose.
H
So
I'm
I'm
sorry
if
I'm
giving
anyone
a
headache
with
this
rapid
clicking
here
here
we
go.
So
this
is
a
list
of
states
now.
Just
to
give
you
an
idea,
an
idea.
The
federal
government
gives
you
broad
provisions
that
you
have
to
sort
of
guidelines
they
have
to
stay
within,
but
states
are
left
to
sort
of
build
and
administer
their
systems
they're,
given
pretty
broadly
way,
so
these
states
all
use
unemployment
rate
as
a
factor
in
determining
the
number
of
weeks
someone
can
collect,
but
the
way
they
build.
It
is
a
little
different.
H
So
let
me
I'll
give
you
an
example
of
states
that
are
sort
of
a
cohort
and
built
it
very
similarly,
and
then
some
other
examples,
because,
let's
not
talk
about
massachusetts,
they
use
it
to
actually
add
weeks.
H
Florida,
georgia,
north
carolina,
tennessee
and
alabama
structure
it
very
similarly,
so
they,
but
but
not
exactly
the
same
right.
So
north
carolina
is
12
to
20
flat.
That's
it
alabama,
I
think,
is
12
to
20
with
a
five-week
option.
If
you
are
participating
in
work,
search,
training,
georgia,
I
think,
is
14
to
20,
and
then
florida
is
12
to
23,
something
like
that.
So
they're,
all
ballpark
close
to
each
other,
kansas
and
arizona,
have
higher
floors
slightly
higher
ceilings.
H
That
was
just
a
political
reality,
arizona
just
passed
it
last
year,
and
that
was
the
deal
that
their
legislators
felt
comfortable.
Working
with.
I
don't
remember
the
weeks
on
that
idaho
uses
a
few
variations.
Now
the
states
that
recently
passed
this
tennessee
alabama
arizona
there
were
issues
with
making
sure
that
their
systems
could
do
it,
making
sure
that
their
agencies,
so
the
agency,
would
come
in
and
say
our
system
is
capable
of.
This
is
not
wisconsin
is
exploring
indexing
and
one
of
the
things
they're
doing
right
now
is
preparing
a
15-point
list
of
capabilities.
H
Their
system
needs
to
be
able
to
have
for
policy
changes
they
want
to
make,
including
indexing,
including
job
referral
systems
and
they're,
going
to
use
federal
money
state
money
that
they
appropriate
to
make
sure
that
their
system,
as
they
get
updated,
can
do
all
15
of
these
things
that
they
want
to
do
from
a
policy
standpoint,
so
in
terms
of
support
versus
opposition,
there's
a
bit
of
a
wide
range.
H
H
Hesitance
and
opposition
comes
from
the
agency's
ability
to
do
it,
or
maybe,
in
some
cases,
worrying
about
workforce
training
and
making
sure
that
people
have
suitable
jobs
that
are
available
to
them.
So
that's
how
alabama
they
they
took
that
option
and
they
added
a
few
weeks
to
provide
training
where
needed,
but
it
in
states
where
they
want
to
be
problem.
H
Solving
so
I'll
tell
you
north
carolina
start
to
finish
the
champion
said
our
system
is
not
it's
not
a
welfare
system,
it's
not
a
handout
system,
it's
a
temporary
bridge
between
jobs
and
they
never
wavered.
So
every
state's
a
little
different.
I
would
anticipate
assuming
that
the
cabinet
in
kentucky
has
buy-in
on
a
concept
like
this
to
increase
workforce
participation.
H
That
would
be
a
conversation.
You'd
need
to
have
certain
regional
considerations,
so
the
united
states
department
of
labor
won't
did
not
let
alabama,
and
that
was
under
the
trump
administration
did
not
let
alabama
said
it
differently
by
region,
so
they
wanted
count
county
level.
Indexing
usdol
said
no,
so
that's
why
they
added
the
five
weeks.
That's
a
consideration
you
might
want
to
think
about,
but
there's
a
number
of
different.
That
was
a
very
long-winded
answer.
I'm
sorry.
I
hope
I
touched
on
anything
approaching
what
you
want.
L
I
don't
think,
there's
a
problem
as
far
as
finding
work
and
really
I
think,
we've
been
talking
about
a
47
million
enhancement
to
a
brand
new
computer
system
in
the
next
18
to
24
months,
so
maybe
even
a
consideration
if
there
is
an
issue
with
that,
since
we'll
have
a
brand
new,
build
it
up
from
scratch
system
that
could
probably
do
all
these
things,
you
know,
might
be
a
consideration
even
if
we
implemented
it
now
to
say
the
date
of
effectiveness
will
be
when
that
system
is
available
and
up
and
running
in
18
to
24
months.
L
So
that's
good
to
hear
that
opposition,
but
that
would
make
a
lot
of
sense.
So
I'm
just
I'm
preparing
members
now
I
always
talk
about
a
lot
of
things,
I'm
looking
at
filing,
so
just
to
put
the
word
out
that
have
a
member
of
leadership
here
as
well.
I
just
think
this
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and,
if
we're
seeing
our
neighboring
competing
states
economically
starting
to
do
these
things,
I
think
it
behooves
us
to
take
a
look
at
things
that
make
us
competitive,
because
this
is
gonna.
H
And
senator
modernization.
Sorry
I
just
one
last
thought:
modernization
is
the
name
of
the
game
right,
we're
talking
about
that
for
program
integrity,
but
if
you
think
about
the
modern
economy
right
with
a
few
key
strokes,
I'm
just
this
morning
before
I
before
I
came
over
here,
I
just
went
on
to
indeed
and
looked
at
how
many
jobs
there
were
in
louisville,
lexington,
covington
frankfurt.
You
know
we're
talking,
I
think
louisville
was
33
000
jobs
in
a
few
keystrokes.
H
Now,
admittedly,
I
don't
know
how
to
do
all
those
jobs,
and
I
don't
know
what
the
feasibility
is,
but
jobs
are
out
there
and
in
a
modern
system
the
the
idea
that
the
standard
baseline
is
that
you
need
half
a
year
to
find
a
job.
I
just
think
that's
outdated
thinking
this
a
half
of
your
meeting,
the
standard
26
weeks
that
most
states
use.
A
G
Try
my
best
to
be
brief
statement
actually
part
of
your
statement
about
the
the
the
people
follow
claims
I
actually
missed.
I
spoke
that
look
at
my
notes
wrong.
It
wasn't
that
they
were
allowed
to
have
part.
They
claimed
part-time.
They
claimed
part-time
jobs.
They
never
had
on
that.
But
anyway,
that
was
my
fault
doing
that,
but
you
know
we
ran.
We
took
run
at
the
ui
several
years.
I
think
it's
2018
and
I
think
this
number
is
still
correct
of
all
the
states
that
touch
kentucky.
G
We
pay
the
most
and
the
longest
and
have
for
a
long
time.
So
that's
part
of
the
problem
and
I'm
going
to
be
honest,
this
employer
and
listen
to
people
across
the
aisle,
I'm
glad
we
rolled
out
what
unemployment
is
and
isn't
today,
because
a
lot
of
my
friends
across
the
aisle
viewed
ui
or
unemployment,
defense
asked
the
new
welfare
program
and
that's
the
way
they're
running
it
right
now,
and
that
concerns
me
gravely
that's
not
what
was
spent
supposed
to
be.
I
Senator
alvarado,
I
pushed
this
bill
in
2018
representative
pratt,
so
with
all
the
problems
we
had
and
miss
shanks
also
said
that
so
we're
going
to
try
to
do
that
again.
Work
with
you
on
that
it's
it
was
funny
on
some
of
it.
The
chamber
fought
me
and
my
own
administration,
the
bevin
administration,
kind
of
put
a
knicks
to
it,
because
a
lot
of
things
we
wanted
to
do
was
to
index
down
and
they
wanted
to
index
down
so
quickly
that
it
was
against
the
federal
rules.
H
Clear
center
you
mean
the
benefit
paid,
not
the.
I
Yes,
duration,
yeah,
that's
that's
correct,
yeah!
So
and
we
another
thing
we
wanted
to
do
with
it
is.
If
you
took
a
job
and
in
training,
we
did
not
want
to
cut
off
the
benefits
and
we
were
having
a
problem
with
that,
because
if
we
cut
it
down
maybe
but
to
help
subsidize
the
employer
and
employee
while
they're
getting
training,
has
other
states
been
able
to
do
that.
H
A
Very
good,
very
good
discussion.
Thank
you,
joe
for
being
here
presenting
seeing
no
other
business.
We
had
a
very
good
discussion
today
on
issues
affecting
unemployment
insurance.
Do
I
have
a
motion
to
adjourn.
Promotion
is
second,
we
are.