Legislative Initiative - Unemployment Insurance and Seasonal Workers Copyrighted
November4, 2019
City of Dubuque Consent Items # 15.
ITEM TITLE: Legislative Initiative - Unemployment Insurance and
Seasonal Workers
SUMMARY: City Manager recommending removal of the Legislative
Initiative for Unemployment Insurance and Seasonal
Workers from the Legislative Priorities.
SUGGESTED DISPOSITION: Suggested Disposition: Receiveand File;Approve
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Legislative Initiati�-Unemployment Insurance and City Manager Memo
Seasonal Workers-MVM Memo
Staff Memo Staff Memo
Dubuque
THE CITY OF �
uI�AaMca cih
DuB E � �
I � � I
Maste iece on the Mississi i Zoo�•zoiz•zois
YP pp zoi�*zoi9
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Legislative Initiative-Unemployment Insurance and Seasonal Workers
DATE: October 31, 2019
At the October 21, 2019, City Council meeting, I made a recommendation to ask the
State of lowa to modify the rules related to seasonal employees being eligible for
unemployment benefits. I provided information at the City Council meeting that I later
questioned and I asked Human Resources Director Shelley Stickfort to do some
additional research.
Shelley is recommending removing this item as a legislative priority.
I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council
approval.
v
Mic ael C. Van Milligen
MCVM:jh
Attachment
cc: Crenna Brumwell, City Attorney
Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager
Cori Burbach, Assistant City Manager
Shelley M. Stickfort, Director of Human Resources
Dubuque
THE CTTY OF �
AII�A�ueriea Cip
DuB E ,� .�
�,I�II �►
Maste iece on the Mississi i zoo�.zo�Z=zo�3
� pp 2017*2019
TO: Mike Van Milligen, City Manager
FROM: Shelley M. Stickfort, Director of Human Resources
DATE: October 29, 2019
SUBJECT: Legislative initiative — Unemployment Insurance and Seasonal Workers
I am writing in follow up to clarification requested by you regarding a proposed
legislative initiative to exempt seasonal employees from eligibility for unemployment
insurance compensation. Given the additional information gleaned and described
below, this initiative is no longer recommended at this time.
A review of the FY19 unemployment data and costs revealed the following:
1. The total cost for FY19 unemployment ("regular" and seasonal employees
combined) was $98,222.
2. The unemployment cost incurred for seasonal emplovees was $59,924.
3. There were no lifeguards or recreation program supervisor positions seasonal
employees who filed a claim for unemployment.
4. The roughly 20 seasonal employees who filed for unemployment are primarily
employed as Seasonal Laborers, except for an Assistant Golf Pro and a
Seasonal Truck Driver. All were employed by the Parks or Recreation
Department.
5. The Seasonal Laborer positions are primarily occupied by a core group of "long-
term" seasonal employees who represent a specific niche of individuals, who are
not college students on summer break, and who do return year over year to the
same assignment relying on unemployment compensation during the off season
months. The median number of years each has returned is 4. The mean is 6.85.
years. The range is from 1 - 26 years.
6. The information provided in items 1-5 is consistent with the prior four fiscal years.
Therefore, the unemployment compensation cost incurred for seasonal employees is
not comprised of seasonal positions that are typically occupied by individuals who are
college students (e.g. life guards, rec programs supervisors). College students do not
usually qualify for unemployment compensation, because they do not usually meet the
eligibility requirement of being "available" for work.
A change in the law that would preclude municipal, seasonal employees from eligibility
to receive unemployment compensation would most likely result in a significant
reduction in the number of seasonal laborers who return year over year and reduced
interest in and ability to successfully recruit for the position over all. This would increase
the costs related to recruitment, hiring, training and onboarding activities for a nearly all
new set of laborers each season. In addition, the lack of experienced laborers would
negatively impact the quality of the services provided and significantly increase the
need for supervisory monitoring and performance management time. The direct and
indirect costs of implementing this proposed legislative change may far exceed the
�$60,000 unemployment compensation cost.
Given the clarification, data, and outcomes indicated, the legislative initiative to exempt
seasonal employees from eligibility for unemployment compensation is no longer
recommended.
2