►
From YouTube: Unemployment Insurance Reform Task Force (11-30-21)
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).
A
A
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
appreciate
that.
Actually,
it
was
just
one
thing
I
was
considering
during
our
discussions
was
regarding
a
workforce,
an
ability
to
be
able
to
have
personnel
available
in
case
another
surge
like
this
possibly
happens,
and
god
forbid
it
does,
but
in
that
instance
I
was.
C
We
had
a
lot
of
discussions
about
having
the
opportunity
to
have
lrc
staff
cross-trained
for
that,
and
so
I
would
think
that
might
be
a
possibility
of
a
recommendation
for
our
group
is
also
to
recommend
that
the
consideration,
if
there's
lrc
staff
that
are
willing
to
volunteer
that
they
would
have
the
ability
to
be
cross-trained
for
that
purpose
in
the
future.
That
would
be
one
of
the
recommendations
we
could
ask.
D
A
A
G
I'll
just
say,
I
think
it's
important
that
the
doctor
among
our
group
is
recommending
to
us
that
we
prepare
in
case
of
a
surge
because
we're
hearing
about
this
omicron
variant,
and
we
should
probably
listen
to
the
doctor
that
and
form
these
recommendations
in
a
way
that
is
flexible
enough
for
us
to
act.
If
there
is
another
surge.
A
A
They
can
take
this
and
go
forward
with
a
bill
or
whatever
they
want
to
do
with
it.
Unless,
chairman
weber
and
our
I
decide
that
we
want
to
be
more
specific
on
exactly
what
we
want
to
do,
and
then
we
would
have
to
have
another
meeting
to
approve
that
so
without
further
ado
janine,
are
you
ready?
Yes,.
B
B
B
A
What
we're
going
to
do
now
is,
if
there's
anyone
wants
to
discuss
any
of
this.
We
will
do
that
and
then
we'll
have
a
vote
on.
If
this
is
acceptable
to
give
to
the
legislature
there,
there
will
always
be
an
opportunity
to
send
to
chairman
webber
ri
something
that
you
want
to
put
in,
and
we
could
maybe
add
as
an
addendum
to
this,
but
right
now
is
there.
Anyone
that
wants
to
speak
on
this
representative
cantrell.
G
G
The
these
pages
aren't
numbered,
but
when
you
look
at
the
un
under
the
recommendations,
the
first
recommendation
first
of
all,
I
just
want
to
say
I
think,
that's
a
I
think,
there's
a
typo
in
that
first
recommendation
when
it
says
indexing
number
of
weeks
payable
tying
that
to
the
state
unemployment
insurance
rate.
I
think
it
should
say
the
state
unemployment
rate.
G
And
then
I'll
have
I
have
some
bigger
picture
input
and
concerns
about
this
report.
The
first
thing
that
I'll
say
about
this
is
that
it
is
probably
less
specific
than
I
think
a
lot
of
us
would
like
it's
not
if
you
look
at
some
of
these
reforming
the
ui
tax
system.
That's
that's
not
very
specific.
It
doesn't
give
the
public
a
lot
of
notice
about
what
what
type
of
legislation
we
might
see
in
the
next
legislative
session
and
develop
ways
to
improve
workforce
participation.
G
I
know
that's
kind
of
a
a
tough
question
to
answer
and
it's
one
that
we're
tackling
in
every
committee
that
that
I'm
on
right
now,
but
we
we've
heard
ways
about
how
to
do
that.
So
we
could
be
a
little
bit
more
specific
in
our
recommendations,
and
I
think
you
know
we're
a
small
group
and
I
think
we
there's
a
lot
of
bipartisan
ways
that
we
could
reach
some
consensus
and
and
develop
some
specific
recommendations
to
our
colleagues
and
probably
the
biggest
concern
that
I
have
with
this
report
and
our
staff
mention
this.
G
We
did
not
hear
from
any
unemployed
workers
who
have
tried
to
navigate
this
system
on
their
own.
There's
been
a
lot
of
groups
that
have
popped
up
about
advoca
advocate
how
to
advocate
for
yourself
in
the
unemployment
sphere
and
a
lot
of
groups
and
people
and
leadership
from
that
have
have
come
up.
We
didn't
hear
from
any
of
them.
We
did
not
hear
from,
for
example,
the
kentucky
center
for
economic
policy
who
studies
locally
some
of
our
workforce
trends.
G
And
then
one
more
thing
that
I'll
mention
is
one
of
the
recommendations
is
consider
the
reforms
recommended
in
house
bill
317
from
the
2019
session.
We
didn't
hear
a
lot
about
that.
We
heard
maybe
some
pieces
that
that
I
know,
because
I
was
a
member
in
2019
that
were
contained
in
house
bill
317
from
2019,
but
we
didn't
go
through
it
and
I
don't
think
we
reach
any
consensus
on
that
point
and-
and
if
you
remember
house,
bill
317,
it
cuts
benefits.
G
It
cuts
the
number
of
eligible
weeks
for
workers
who
have
lost
their
job
through
no
fault
of
their
own,
and
I
really
don't
think
that
we
should
have
used
this
opportunity
to
look
at
our
unemployment
insurance
system
and
use
that
as
a
way
to
cut
benefits
for
workers.
So
that's
going
to
be
my
input
on
these
recommendations.
G
A
Thank
you
representative,
but
we
were
open
to
anyone
coming.
We
were
actually
reaching
out
to
people
and
you
were
had
a
chance
to
discuss
anything
that
you
wanted
as
any
member
of
the
committee
and
we
would
have
entertained
anyone
that
you
suggested
coming
and
that's
why
I've
also
opened
it
up
for
you
and
everyone
else
that
if
they
have
something
they
want
to
put
as
an
addendum
to
this
we're
open
to
that,
because
we
were
not
excluding
or
intending
to
exclude
anyone.
A
We
work
with
the
labor
cabinet
extensively,
even
behind
the
scenes
to
try
to
get
this
right,
and
certainly
certainly
not
looking
at
the
unemployed
people
and
excluding
them.
That's
what
we're
here
for
so
you
know
I'll
take
note
of
what
you
say:
I'm
not
totally
in
agreement
with
you,
but
thank
you
for
your
comments
and
representative
weber.
Has
chairman
webber
had
something
to
say.
D
D
I
think,
probably,
and
and
I
would
have
entertained
the
idea
of
any
any
group
that
you
wanted
to
have,
come
and
speak
today,
because
the
entire
purpose
of
this
task
force
when
it
was
included
in
house
bill
413,
was
to
look
at
the
unemployment
system,
which
we
now
have
had.
Two
significant
hits
to
2009
recession
and
then
2020
coveted.
D
I'm
not
sure
this
system
can
withstand
another
hit
and
we
needed
to
make
sure
that
there
were
reforms
in
place
to
proceed
forward.
I
have
met
with
secretary
link,
I
met
with
secretary
roberts.
I
met
with
various
folks
to
discuss
how
we
approach
this,
and
I
was
very
open
to
that
to
those
discussions.
Anybody
that
wanted
to
come
forward.
D
C
First
of
all,
thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
think
for
letting
us
be
part
of
this
task
force.
It
provides
a
very
important
role
and
I
think
we're
correct
that
we
don't
want
to
politicize.
This
there's
been
one
thing
that
we
have
seen
over
and
over
and
is
that
our
working
families
have
been
hurt
devastated,
my
colleague
from
jefferson
county.
She
had
a
lot
of
great
points
and-
and
I
really
respect
her
passion
and
her
stance-
and
I
share
in
some
of
this-
and
I
won't
repeat
it
for
redundancy.
C
C
How
that
we
can
this
system
how
we
could
reform
it,
but
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
specifics
in
there
and
we
did
take
some
time
in
this
committee
and
we've
heard
from
from
different
people
and
we've
heard
to
their
their
their
specific
issues,
mostly
from
all
of
our
emails
as
senators
and
legislators.
We're
getting
those
calls
right,
those
working
families
that
are
hurting
those
people
that
are
struggling.
But
what
are
the
specifics
that
we
really
are
going
to
do
to
change?
C
My
worry
is
we
don't
want
to
put
misinformation,
and
sometimes
when
we
have
real
vague
things,
go
out
there
without
those
specifics,
then
people
become
confused
about
what
the
overall
system
is
and
ui.
Unemployment
is
not
a
force
of
welfare.
It's
not
that
it
is
literally
people
who
have
been
working
working
families,
you've
paid
into
a
system
have
there.
We
have
economic
downturn,
they're
there
to
be
picked
back
up
and
really
from
all
of
us
have
taken
economics
classes.
C
We
know
when
we
hit
a
recession
when
things
happen,
it
actually
benefits
us,
as
not
only
common
nation,
from
hitting
the
devastation
of
that
whenever
we
have
those
downturns.
Some
of
that
offsets-
and
I
agree-
and
I
think
that
anybody
here
will
agree
that
we
got
to
have
that
balance
and
we're
looking
for
how
we
can
make
things
better.
C
My
really
concern
here
is
the
lack
of
specifics
that
we've
laid
out,
because
I
think
this
committee
has
done
a
good
job
as
far
as
is
trying
to
educate
ourselves
and
and
listen
reach
out.
Listen
to
our
constituents
turn
these
emails,
but
if
we
have,
if
we
don't
have
the
specifics
in
there
on
the
problem-
and
some
of
those
things
that
we
can
do
is
to
make
the
our
workforce
here
better
and
we
failed
to
do
that.
C
C
I
I
am
getting
those
calls-
and
I
think
mr
chair
and
co-chair
members
of
the
committee,
I
think
you
are
as
well,
and
so
I
hope
that
we
can
kind
of
work
to
improve
those
things
and
and
also
know
where,
in
fact,
we're
getting.
You
know
the
foundation
for
government
accountability
and
things
and
look
and
see
where
some
of
those
bias
may
be
in
those
reports
and
try
to
avoid
going
down
that
tunnel.
I
appreciate
you,
let
me
speak.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
I'd
like
to
make
one
correction
to
senator
yates
comments,
and
that
is
that
workers
do
not
pay
into
the
unemployment
system.
That
is
something
that
is
provided
by
companies
that
are
making
sure
there
is
a
safety
net
for
their
workers,
companies
pay
into
the
unemployment
trust
fund.
H
We
have
had
to
supplement
that
with
federal
money
and
you
know
stuff-
that's
come
through
and
fortunate
enough
to
have
some
of
that
federal
money
to
help
we've
had
to
borrow
from
the
federal
government
in
order
to
pay
the
benefits
that
have
been
paid.
Of
course,
we've
talked
about
the
fraud
that
has
existed
where
we've
got
something
in
that
on
the
recommendations
trying
to
take
care
of
that.
H
But
let
me
just
say
I
think
companies
get
a
bad
rep,
but
that
is
something
they
provide
and
you
know
to
make
sure
that
their
workers
are
taken
care
of
as
far
as
unemployment
is
concerned,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
everybody
understood
that,
because
sometimes
they
get
portrayed
as
the
bad
guy.
The
other
thing
that
I
would
say
about
the
minimum
wage.
H
You
know
that's
something
that
the
market
is
taking
care
of.
In
fact,
you
know
everybody
is
being
forced
to
raise
their
wages
right
now
and
I
think,
over
in
clay
county.
I
was
talking
to
the
senate
president
yesterday
and
he
was
talking
about
like
a
warehouse
job
that
they
are
having
such
hard
time
finding
people
they're
offering
28
dollars
an
hour.
H
I
mean
that's
unbelievable
to
me.
You
know
that,
and
there
are
you
know,
jobs
in
my
area.
We
have
8
000,
open
jobs,
that
we
don't
have
people
that
have
the
skills
or
that
are
willing
to
take
those
jobs
and
every
single
one
of
them
are
above
the
15
range.
So
I
think
the
market
is
already
taking
care
of
that
and
is
taking
care
of
that,
and
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
see
it
going
back.
The
other
direction
so
just
add
a
couple
of
caveats
to
those
comments
is
mine.
Thank
you.
C
Absolutely
thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
senator
wilson.
Thank
you
for
the
clarification.
If
I
misspoke
as
an
employer,
I
definitely
pay
into
that
into
that
tax.
I'm.
Obviously
it's
only
being
paid
for
my
working
employees,
employees
that
are
actually
working
to
the
system,
so
it
would
come
out
of
my
payroll
deduction
tax
that
I
pay
into
for
that
employee
who
is
working
and
only
applied
for
those
employees
that
are
working
and
we're
absolutely
agreement
on
the
same
thing.
C
D
And
if
I
recall
correctly,
he
brought
a
check
that
day.
I
think
he
had
been
paid
a
few
cents
on
that,
but
the
opportunity
was
given
for
individuals
to
come
and
testify
before
this
committee
representative
sharp,
took
advantage
of
that
and
had
one
of
his
constituents
come,
and
I
think
that
it
was.
It
was
good
information
for
this
committee
to
hear
and
know
so
for
the
record.
I
wanted
that
clarified
and
reminding
members
of
the
committee.
A
All
right,
I
want
to
make
a
couple
comments,
and
first
thing:
I've
said
this:
over
and
over
again,
the
people
on
unemployment
insurance
are
not
moochers.
There
are
people
that
have
actually
been
working
and
through
no
fault
over
their
own
are
unemployed
because
they
don't
get
unemployment
insurance
if
they
weren't
working.
So
these
are
people.
These
are
hardworking
people
that,
through
no
fault
of
their
own,
have
been
unemployed.
A
So
what
we're
doing
here
is
to
try
to
make
the
system
in
the
future
work
for
them
and
for
the
businesses
and
for
kentucky
one
thing
that
we're
we're
pushing
and
we're
pushing
before
this
pandemic
is
for
workforce
training.
The
the
skills
training
is,
we
lack
in
kentucky
and
nationwide,
and
we
want
to
help
that.
A
No,
so
I
would
give
the
labor
cabinet
an
opportunity
to
say
a
little
something
if
you'd
like
morgan
before
she
would
not
she's
we've
we've
spoken
often,
so
we
appreciate
your
input
and
we
will
appreciate
your
input
again.
If
we
come
up
with
a
bill.
Did
you
want
to
you
want
some
call?
You
want
the
last
word
all
right,
representative
pratt.
We
will
give
you
the
last
word.
E
Thank
you
very
much
chairman
anemis,
as
we
conclude
and
I've
written
this
down,
so
excuse
me
reading
this
I'll
make
sure
you
get
it
right,
as
we
include
the
special
committee
looking
at
the
state
of
unemployment
insurance
in
kentucky,
I
want
to
iterate.
In
my
opinion,
the
labor
labor
currently
does
not
have
the
authority
to
oversee
ui.
They
may
have
been
given
the
authority
to
oversee
weisner.
Pagner.
E
Excuse
me
wagner
peissner,
but
not
ui.
Further.
I
want
to
make
clear
that
the
ky
career
centers
fall
under
the
workforce
innovation
opportunity
act
and
are
responsible
for
the
local
workforce
boards,
not
the
education,
workforce,
development,
cabinet
or
labor.
It
is
my
opinion
that
there
continues
to
be
a
lot
of
issues
around
staffing
management,
duplication
of
services
and
lack
of
coordination
with
the
local
workforce
boards.
That
will
continue
to
hold
us
back
in
solving
the
unemployment
entrance
issues,
as
well
as
other
workforce
issues.
We
have
in
kentucky
merging
education,
workforce
with
labor
or
hiring
99.
E
Additional
staff
is
not
the
answer
further.
I
have
not
received
an
answer
to
what
funding
source
was
used
to
support
ky
chambers,
new
job
portal
and
still
do
not
understand
why
it
cannot
merge
with
the
ui
system.
We
have
now
is
a
duplication
of
services
and
is
funded
with
federal
dollars
awarded
by
the
state.
We
are
at
a
critical
point
in
kentucky
with
a
recent
announcement
of
plant
locations
and
expansions.
E
If
we
do
not
get
our
arms
around
all
these
issues,
we
will
not
meet
the
obligation
of
providing
a
trained
workforce
in
the
next
five
years.
I
do
want
to
thank
miss
eve.
She's
reached
out
me
a
couple
times
to
talk
about
the
upgraded
computer
system.
Unfortunately,
it's
like
peeling
the
onion
there's
so
many
layers.
I
have
not
had
time
to
actually
get
all
the
work
done,
but
I
want
to
iterate.
We
are
I'm
concerned
with
the
build
up
from
the
ground
up.
I
will
give
you
example
in
licensure
licensing.
E
They
had
a
system
called
avis,
they
upgraded
to
cavis.
It
is
eight
years
in
the
making
and
still
not
finished
so
with
that.
I'm
concerned
that
we
will
be
eight
years
out.
This
system
will
not
be
built,
we'll
still
be
where
we
are,
and
hopefully
this
does
not
come
again.
So
thank
you
guys
very
much.
Let
me
speak.
A
C
I
would
I'm
trying
to
think
of
it,
rewarded,
maybe
perhaps
or
the
caveat
were
permitted
within
federal
statutes
or
federal
regulations
to
allow.
I
would
recommend
that
you
know.
Lrc
staff
that
are
willing
to
volunteer
to
assist
could
be
cross-trained
to
assist
the
department
of
labor
or
whatever
department
this
will
be
put
under
either
currently
or
in
the
future.
A
That's
fine,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
exact
because
in
a
bill
or
when
it's
done
it
would
have
to
be
exact
so
you're
just
making
a
recommendation
to
be
added
to
the
report
so
you've
made
that
motion.
Do
I
hear
a
second
all
in
favor
opposed
all
right
we'll.
We
will
add
that
I
have
someone
in
the
audience
that
is
asked
to
speak
and
I
will
allow
them
a
short
period
of
time.
Jeff
wiggins
from
the
afl-cio
is.
A
I
I
I
I
They
want
a
living
minimum
wage
and
that's
the
problem
with
that
employment
system
and
that's
a
problem
why
people
don't
go
back
to
work
is
because
it's
not
a
job
problem.
It's
not
some!
Some
of
it's
not
a
skill
problem.
The
problem
is
pay
and,
like
you
said
it's
going
to
fix
itself,
it's
going
to
fix
itself.
If
people
want
people
to
work,
then
pam.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
and
now
this
is
just
a
report
with
recommendations
and
in
the
report
it
shows
that
that's
the
chamber's
recommendation
now
when
we
come
with
a
bill,
then
we
would
absolutely
like
to
hear
from
you
and
as
far
as
the
pay
and
that
that
the
on
this
on
unemployment
system
can't
do
anything
about
what
people
pay
it's
only
when
you're
not
employed
and
as
far
as
to
tear
down
well,
that
still
could
be
in
discussion.
So,
and
we
appreciate
your
comments.
Yes,
sir.
F
F
But
what
I
was
saying
was,
I
don't
think
it's
been
considered
what
this
is
going
to
do
to
some
industries
like
blacktopping,
for
instance,
we
have
a
lot
of
workers
in
the
blacktop
industry.
It
shuts
down
every
winter,
the
blacktop
industry,
the
blacktop
plants
shut
down,
blacktopping
stops
when
weather
warms
back
up
those
people
go
back
to
work
and
a
lot
of
times.
F
That
is
a
lot
longer
than
what
is
being
recommended
in
your
or
the
chamber's
recommending
in
your
report,
and
I
think,
there's
instances
that
that
that
needs
to
be
looked
at.
We
can.
We
can
certainly
understand
the
the
need
to
prevent
fraud
and
and
all
that,
but
I
would
just
add
that
to
what
my
colleagues
said,
that
there
there
are
some
industries
that
that
workers
are
going
to
leave
if
they
can't
rely
on
unemployment
in
their
downtime
every
year.
D
A
We
did
that
by
there's
a
class
a
and
a
class
b,
and
the
class
b
was
the
I
think,
the
class
a
was
you're
not
expected
to
go
back
to
work
and
the
other.
There
is
a
job
that
is
waiting
for
you,
like
the
ford
planning
like
the,
and
they
were
excluded
from
the
teardown
in
his
bill.
That
is
true,
but
thank
you
for
the
point.
A
A
I
A
G
I'm
cussing
and
explaining
a
no
vote
and
I
really
have
enjoyed
being
a
member
of
this
task
force
and
there's
a
lot.
This
report
is
fairly
thick
and
there's
a
lot
to
go
through
yesterday.
There's
a
lot
of
good
stuff
in
here,
probably
the
the
best
parts
of
it
are
the
the
parts
from
the
recommendations
from
the
auditor.
Those
were
mostly
critiquing
internal
practices
of
the
labor
cabinet,
a
lot
of
which
we've
heard
that
they've
corrected
or
implemented
procedures
to
try
to
correct
those
and
they're
things
we
can't
legislate
anyway.
G
Like
I
discussed
in
my
earlier
comments,
my
my
larger
concerns
are
the
the
testimony
that
we
heard
to
get
to
the
recommendations
that
we
got
today
and
then
my
concern
that
the
recommendations
might
lead
to
legislation
that
implements
cuts
for
unemployed
workers,
unemployed
workers
who
rely
on
unemployment.
Insurance
are
workers
who
lost
their
job
through
no
fault
of
their
own.
G
G
You
know
sort
of
a
part
of
this
pandemic
that
we're
living
through
right
now
and
through
no
fault
of
their
own
they're.
In
these
circumstances,
and
some
of
these
recommendations,
I
think,
would
have
a
disproportionate
impact
on
our
brothers
and
sisters
in
in
the
far
east
and
far
western
parts
of
the
states
where
there
is
higher
than
average
unemployment
and
minorities
who
suffer
from
higher
than
average
unemployment.
G
So
we
have
to
think
about
those
groups
of
people
when
we
implement
recommendations
like
this,
and
when
we
take
the
time
for
ourselves
and
the
taxpayers
time
to
have
these
meetings,
we
need
to
come
up
with
more
specific
recommendations
than
what
we're
recommending.
So
that's.
I
don't
want
to
reiterate
too
much
of
what
I
said
earlier,
but
those
are
the
main
reasons
that
I
vote
no
today.
E
A
C
No,
I
I
just
wanted
to
first
of
all
thank
the
committee
for
the
time
and
effort
at
this
time.
I
do
make
a
no
vote,
but
with
the
hope
that
we
can
get
there
so,
and
I
appreciate
you
leaving
it
open
for
us
to
be
able
to
send
some
recommendations
over
and
hopefully
we
can
resolve
some
of
those
issues
we
still
have
outstanding.
So
thank
you.