Economic insecurity, due to unemployment, being a serious menace to the health, morale,
and general welfare of the people of this state, is, therefore, a subject of interest
and concern to the community as a whole, warranting appropriate action by the general
assembly to prevent its spread and to lighten the burden that now falls on the unemployed
worker and his or her family. According to the report of the joint special commission
appointed pursuant to the joint resolutions, the evidence seems conclusive that in
the face of recurring periods of business depression, which industry and commerce
appear powerless to prevent, the industrial worker’s position is extremely insecure.
The individual is as incapable of protecting himself or herself against unemployment
as industry is of preventing it. Experience has shown that if the state delays action
until unemployment becomes excessive, it can neither promptly create the organizations
necessary to orderly, economical, and effective relief, nor bear the financial burden
of relief without disrupting its whole system of ordinary revenues and jeopardizing
its credit. Chapters 42 — 44 of this title are designed to meet in some measure this
situation by providing for the accumulation of a fund to assist in protecting the
public against the ill effects of unemployment that may arise in future years.
Notes of Decisions
Arnold v. Rhode Island Dep't of Labor, 822 A.2d 164 (R.I. 2003).
· cites it 2× “” G.L.1956 § 28-42-2. To that end, the Legislature has provided for a claimant’s attorney’s fees to be paid by the director in cases that are appealed to an appeals body other than a court of law.”
Berberian v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., Bd. of Review, 414 A.2d 480 (R.I. 1980).
· cites it 2× “In conclusion we believe that section 28-42-2 expresses the Legislature’s concern that the unemployed worker be relieved from the financial burden of periodic unemployment over which the worker has little control.”
Turner v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., Bd. of Review, 479 A.2d 740 (R.I. 1984).
“1956 (1979 Reenactment) § 28-42-2, and the benefits are designed to protect against the ill effects of unemployment that occurs in depressed economic times.”
Rojas v. Fitch, 928 F. Supp. 155 (D.R.I. 1996).
· cites it 2× “G.L. § 28-42-2. Section 28-42-8 exempts certain types of employment from the requirements of the Employment Security Act.”
Unemployed Workers Union v. Hackett, 332 F. Supp. 1372 (D.R.I. 1971).
“Among its goals is making the public and unemployed workers aware of rights and benefits under Rhode Island General Laws § 28-42-2 et seq. Information is given about food stamp and welfare benefits as well as about unemployment compensation.”
Almacs, Inc. v. Hackett, 312 F. Supp. 964 (D.R.I. 1970).
“In particular the statute's statement of purpose, § 28-42-2 G.L.R.I.1956, as amended, makes clear the general welfare nature of the statute.”
Fontaine v. Bd. of Review of Dep't of Emp. Sec., 210 A.2d 867 (R.I. 1965).
“The question to be decided is whether the trial justice’s interpretation of the proviso' truly reflects the legislative intent expressed by the language therein.”
Murphy v. Fascio, 340 A.2d 137 (R.I. 1975).
“Those policies are stated in general terms in §28-42-2. That statute indicates that unemployment benefits were intended to alleviate the economic insecurity arising from termination of employment the prevention of which was effectively beyond the employee’s control.”
Grinnell Corp. v. Hackett, 344 F. Supp. 749 (D.R.I. 1972).
“In particular the statute’s statement of purpose, § 28-42-2 G.L. R.I.1956, as amended, makes clear the general welfare nature of the statute.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.