@Tony T. That’s assuming they qualify for unemployment. I know of employers that have reduced the hours of their employees drastically. They don’t want to lose the employees so instead of letting them go and letting them collect on their employment insurance, they reduce their hours. This puts the employee in a bind. They want and need their jobs after things get better, but because they still have jobs they do not qualify to get unemployment. This one person is fee for service. Her income is dependent on the amount of clients she evaluates weekly. Employer pays her medical insurance if she meets a minimum amount of clients a week. They are not holding her to the minimum since there is less work now , but her income is reduced drastically because of the amount of clients she meets now .
Not sure how this situation applies to ride share workers but another example is when a family has two incomes and one of the incomes is below the income tax requirement. Some work part time in bars and get paid mostly cash. Will they qualify for unemployment? Then of course there are people like Nannies, Baby sitters etc that are not on the books and contribute to family income. Even if they were qualified as far as income when they rented the apartment, many of them live beyond their means , including landlords, not expecting something like this to happen. There are a bunch of other scenarios that apply to both sides as with homeowners in foreclosure who depend on the rent from the multi family they live in , until the auction is scheduled
or Bankruptcy is resolved. I know people in that situation also. The government should convert tenants to section 8 and perhaps scale back on the unemployment. Give them options.
