Income Replacement and Reemployment Programs
in Michigan and Neighboring States
Upjohn Institute Staff Working Paper 02-86
Stephen A. Woodbury
Senior Economist, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research
Professor, Michigan State University
e-mail: woodbury@upjohninstitute.org
October 2002
JEL Classification Codes: H25, H77, J24, J28, J32, J38, J65
Abstract
Governments in every developed industrial economy administer programs that partially replace
the earnings of workers who suffer job loss or on-the-job injury. In addition, governments
administer programs to help job losers gain reemployment, either through direct job placement
(for those who are job-ready) or through retraining (for those who are not).
This chapter describes and discusses current policy issues surrounding the main social insurance
and reemployment programs in Michigan: Unemployment Insurance (UI), which partially replaces
lost earnings following loss of a job; Workers' Compensation (WC), which pays for medical
treatment, vocational rehabilitation, and lost earnings following a work-related injury or
illness; and the cluster of reemployment and training programs that, since 1998, has come
under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). In addition to describing these programs, a
main goal of the chapter is to offer a critical view of Michigan's programs by comparing
them with corresponding programs in neighboring states.
Discussion of these three programs could hardly be more timely. UI has come under
attack for a range of alleged failings, and the Michigan legislature passed a bill in April
2002 that increased weekly benefits, lengthened benefit durations, and tightened the eligibility
requirements for UI in Michigan. Also, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 has resulted in
significant changes in reemployment services nationwide as well as in Michigan, and there is
continuing debate over the effectiveness of the "work first" approach that WIA entails. Finally,
WC has gone through cycles in which dramatic cost increases have been followed by efforts at cost
containment. Michigan's WC law has seen only minor changes during the last 20 years because reforms
instituted in the early 1980s appear to have kept both medical and wage replacement costs of WC
in Michigan in line with those in other states. However, health care costs are projected to resume
their growth in the near future, which would directly affect WC costs and put increased pressure
on the WC system.
NOTE: A revised version of this paper appears in Michigan at the Millennium: A Benchmark and Analysis of Its Fiscal and Economic Structure, C. Ballard, P. Courant, D. Drake, R. Fisher, and E. Gerber, eds., East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press. 2003, pp. 389-412.
Full text | Institute Home Page | Back to Staff Working
Papers
 
 
 
|