[NOS2Go4Me]

Sparky:

Good show on the numbers. If nothing else, that's what this discussion is supposed to be about: tearing down the layers of obfuscation and misninformation and putting it all out there.

I'm no happier about seasonal workers collecting EI than you are - I work my "52" weeks a year and am paid accordingly. We, too, have been hit by layoffs here nad I know that there was compensation paid out with the layoffs.

In a manner of speaking, I assume this "SUB" is a supplementary payment above and beyond EI. So, to have your earnings taxed (it's been like 9+ years since I pulled EI) doesn't seem unreasonable when you're getting paid 85% of your pay to sit at home. It might not be what you want to do, but getting paid 85% of your gross to do nothing isn't a bad gig. It could be worse... it could be welfare.

So Myth #1, bottom line: workers get 85% of their gross take-home. Gotcha. And they still get taxed. It's a payhcheque, so yeah - you'll get taxed!

Myth #2: while the amount paid out is less than we were initially led to believe (misconception, media or otherwise)... yes, they're still being paid by the company, outside of direct E.I. The fact it was negotiated in a contract doesn't make it any easier on the company or have any less bearing at the time they need to count their nickels and dimes. 15% of a paycheque (or whatever it ends up being) for 10,000+ workers for a year is still a significant chunk of cash, even taken at the monthly level. When you don't have the revenue coming in, it's significant.

What I would be really interested in knowing is what percentage of the 85% is E.I. and what percentage is SUB. :)

A cost is a cost is a cost, regardless of whether it was negotiated or if it's even mandated by the government (not that it was, just saying is all). No matter how you come around to spending the cash, spending the cash when you don't have any isn't a smart scenario and obviously weighs on the company's debt load.