This morning on the news the story was that women are being shortchanged by EI(Employment Insurance) due to the fact that the ladies don't get to collect money that is rightfully theirs. And that's the fault of the EI rules where people who should be getting it--those paying into EI--aren't getting their money back.
But I find it interesting the news reports didn't specify which organization submitted that news release.
While more women than men may not be getting Employment Insurance nowhere in the news has it said today that men too get shortchanged.
Believe you me I know.
I have a part-time job of 20-plus years. I was informed by EI(at the time called UI--Unemployment Insurance)that I don't qualify for even partial EI.
I'm having a hell of a time paying my bills(including rent) now and buying groceries but those who make the EI rules could care less about that too. I also don't qualify for EI's Small Business Assistance program because I am working. Yep you read that correctly. The fact that I have been paying into EI all this time accounts for nothing.
Certainly I'm not the only male being shortchanged by stringent and ridiculous EI rules which allow the lazy-ass sit at home person to collect the money but not the people who actually pay into it.
And I'm very disappointed in the media reports acting as if only women get ripped off by the EI system.
Why couldn't the news story say something to the effect of "More Women Than Men Are Being Ripped Off By EI"?
By the way the only place I could find reference to who gave this story(it was Statistics Canada)was in the Toronto Star(and I've got enough criticism with the Star but that's another issue for another time)--this time the Toronto Stardid good--and also alluded to men collecting or not collecting EI. Now why couldn't the rest of the media report this other info as well?
