-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Any similar cases I can refer to that have won
- Thread starter Jc1008
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
My employer gave me a paper on a Friday that said I had to provide invoices with specific things on it by that Monday or I would be docked for every month I did not have the invoices for on my next paycheck. He wanted the invoices from January through August. The amount docked was going to be $500 for a total of 4000 if these invoices were not given to him by that Monday. I told him I can get him the invoices but not by that Monday because that only gives me the weekend to get them and I have to call the place to have them send it to me. He said that's fine just show me your bank statement in the meantime and we will call it good. I said great I'm going to print out my bank statement. I was then informed by the office manager that I still have to sign the paper that said I had to provide the invoices by that Monday or I would be docked on my next paycheck. When I went back to discuss it with my employer he said yes you can show me your bank to say that but you still have to sign this paper. I said but this paper is not what we agreed upon and I don't feel comfortable signing it. I said I can find something else if you want that shows what we talked about. He said you will either sign this paper or you will be fired. So I did not sign and I was fired. At the unemployment hearing he states that I quit and and said it was none of his business that I did not have to provide the documentation he requested. I lost the unemployment case because the officer said I could have just crossed out the date on the paper he wanted me to sign and then signed it. Unfortunately I did not think of that option at the time nor was that presented to me by my employer. I did offer to sign something else but was denied. The hearing officer says I was insubordinate and that I do not get unemployment benefits because of that. Has this happened to anyone else? I will be appealing
cbg
I'm a Northern Girl
I doubt if you will find anyone else who has had an identical experience. However, here you will find a responder by the name of commentator, who knows more about unemployment claims than any other three people I know. You will do well to listen to what she tells you, when she gets here.
If you truly had a hearing, you'd have received a decision with "findings of fact" and "reasoning and conclusions of law." Type them in. That's what's going to decide if you really have something worth going further.
Last edited:
The fact-finding and the conclusions of law paragraph is quite large. But the first part of the conclusions of law states the Colorado Employment Security Act Section 8-73-108 (5)(e)(VI)C.R.S provides for a disqualification from unemployment insurance benefits from the employer when the reason for the separation is insubordination. The hearing officer concludes that the claimant was discharged because the employer believe that she was refusing to obey a reasonable instruction. The hearing officer concludes that the employer's request provide documentation was a reasonable request. the hearing officer recognizes that the specific paragraph that the claimant was asked to sign was an artfully written and caused the claimant to be concerned about the possibility of suddenly being docked $4,000. Never the less the claimant failed to express her reasons for refusing to sign and she was told verbally that she could have more time to provide documentation and that she could provide documentation other than actual invoices. The conversation escalated before parties could have a rational discussion about claimants reservations but the hearing officer has persuaded that the claimant failed to express her concerns and failed to offer to sign a different paragraph or to write in her own changes to the proposed paragraph. The fact that the documentation will need to be provided by August 24th did not make the paragraph inaccurate rather the claimant could simply have changed the date and initialed it and the hearing officer is persuaded that the employer would have been satisfied with that. And considering the totality of the circumstances the hearing officer concludes that a reasonable person similarly-situated would not have refused to sign the document as such based upon the testimony they claim it is at fault for the separation and is disqualified.
It's like the hearing officer only heard bits and pieces of my testimony because what she was saying was only partially correct. I did ask for something else to sign and I was the one that brought it up in the first place that I couldn't get that invoice is in in time. Obviously the repercussions of not having the invoices in on time leads to a $4,000 dock on my paycheck. Of course the doctor knew that.. he's the one that wrote that if I don't have the invoices in on time I would be the one who gets docked the $500 on my next paycheck for every month I couldn't provide invoices for ...thats why I asked to show bank statements in the first place!
It's like the hearing officer only heard bits and pieces of my testimony because what she was saying was only partially correct. I did ask for something else to sign and I was the one that brought it up in the first place that I couldn't get that invoice is in in time. Obviously the repercussions of not having the invoices in on time leads to a $4,000 dock on my paycheck. Of course the doctor knew that.. he's the one that wrote that if I don't have the invoices in on time I would be the one who gets docked the $500 on my next paycheck for every month I couldn't provide invoices for ...thats why I asked to show bank statements in the first place!
When you're writing a board of review appeal and trying to get help, you can't really work with little snippets. To do it right, you need the transcript and the decision.
You've provided a little from the decision, but I think you changed things. As it stands now, I'd challenge the hearing officer's conclusion. It would really help if the actual document you were asked to sign was admitted as evidence. However, I wasn't at your hearing, and I can't imagine a situation where an employer would think it necessary to make an employee sign such an agreement. Were you accused of stealing of money? What is this all about? Were these amounts reimbursements that you received and didn't submit proper documentation?
The 500 was money to go towards my medical insurance. One employee took his money and went to Vegas with it so he told me he just wanted to make sure I was spending it on medical insurance. There was no reason for him to think I was dishonest in anyway however in my own opinion he was looking for a reason to fire me as i was not taking the bait to quit in my own. There is a lengthy back story if you want to hear it but i dont think my back story is going to help this situation. Here is the finding of facts:
The claimant worked for this employer for 8 years. The claimant was discharged because the employer believed that she was refusing to provide documentation to substantiate that she was using payments from the employer to purchase health insurance. For approximately the last four years the employer was paying some of the employees additional funds over their usual wages in the amount of 500 per month so that they can purchase their own health insurance. The employer treated this as miscellaneous compensation. While updating Personnel files the office manager determined that the employer should have documentation from each such employee to verify that they were in fact using the 500 per month to purchase health insurance. The employer had also been instructed by payroll company that they need some documentation to that effect. On Friday August 21st the claimant was presented with a document called miscellaneous compensation policy employers exhibit 1. The document consisted of a single paragraph which stated that documentation of an active health insurance policy was required. The documentation asked the employees to provide copies of paid invoices from January 2015 to the present, by Monday August 24th. The documentation stated that if invoices were not provided by the 24th the $500 per month that had been paid for any months that were not documented would be withheld from the next paycheck. The claimant stated that she would be unable to obtain invoices from her health insurance provider by Monday August 24th. The claimant believe that the paragraph was inaccurate because it stated that the documentation must be provided by August 24th. The claimant feared that if she could not document health insurance for preceding eight months she would suddenly be docked $4,000, which was more than any single paycheck and she would not be able to afford that. The claimant indicated to the employer that she was willing to print out a bank statement showing the automatic deductions each month for her health insurance coverage and she left the room to print out a bank statement. However when the discussion resumed it escalated into an angry argument in which the dr told the claimant that she had to provide some kind of verification as a condition of her employment and the claimant continued saying that she refused to sign a document that has been presented. The employer believed the claimant quit by refusing to sign the document and the claimant believed she was being discharged for refusing to sign the document. The parties never got to the point of discussing the claimants objection to signing that particular paragraph because of her belief that it was inaccurate or any discussion of whether the claimant could sign some alternate agreement or provide alternate proof of insurance other than invoices for each month. The claimant acknowledged at the hearing that the doctor verbally told her she did not need to provide invoices by the following Monday but she feared that if she signed the document it would take precedence over any verbal instructions and that she would be held to the written document.
So after the part where it says I left to print out my bank statement, ( which I wanted to enter as an exhibit but the officer said there was no point because it did not have my medical insurance deduction on it. I was aware of that but I was not aware of that at the time. After I printed off my bank statement I went to find a Sharpie to black out everything but my medical insurance. As I was looking for the pen I was interrupted by the office manager to sign this paper in which I had stated I just talked to the doctor and he said I can just give him my bank statement. She had stated that's not what he said to me and so we went back into the room to talk to him again. It was only until I was looking for this bank statement to present in this hearing that I recognize I printed off the wrong statement. I recently switched the automatic withdrawal to a different account because the bank card it came off of expired and I had this new bankcard handy when updating the info . But I still wanted to enter this as an exhibit because it showed the date that I printed it which was that Friday. I even wanted to call a witness who saw me printing it and asked me what I was doing but the hearing officer said that that was not necessary because no one disbelieved I went to print out a bank statement) is basically when she got the rest of the story wrong .
The claimant worked for this employer for 8 years. The claimant was discharged because the employer believed that she was refusing to provide documentation to substantiate that she was using payments from the employer to purchase health insurance. For approximately the last four years the employer was paying some of the employees additional funds over their usual wages in the amount of 500 per month so that they can purchase their own health insurance. The employer treated this as miscellaneous compensation. While updating Personnel files the office manager determined that the employer should have documentation from each such employee to verify that they were in fact using the 500 per month to purchase health insurance. The employer had also been instructed by payroll company that they need some documentation to that effect. On Friday August 21st the claimant was presented with a document called miscellaneous compensation policy employers exhibit 1. The document consisted of a single paragraph which stated that documentation of an active health insurance policy was required. The documentation asked the employees to provide copies of paid invoices from January 2015 to the present, by Monday August 24th. The documentation stated that if invoices were not provided by the 24th the $500 per month that had been paid for any months that were not documented would be withheld from the next paycheck. The claimant stated that she would be unable to obtain invoices from her health insurance provider by Monday August 24th. The claimant believe that the paragraph was inaccurate because it stated that the documentation must be provided by August 24th. The claimant feared that if she could not document health insurance for preceding eight months she would suddenly be docked $4,000, which was more than any single paycheck and she would not be able to afford that. The claimant indicated to the employer that she was willing to print out a bank statement showing the automatic deductions each month for her health insurance coverage and she left the room to print out a bank statement. However when the discussion resumed it escalated into an angry argument in which the dr told the claimant that she had to provide some kind of verification as a condition of her employment and the claimant continued saying that she refused to sign a document that has been presented. The employer believed the claimant quit by refusing to sign the document and the claimant believed she was being discharged for refusing to sign the document. The parties never got to the point of discussing the claimants objection to signing that particular paragraph because of her belief that it was inaccurate or any discussion of whether the claimant could sign some alternate agreement or provide alternate proof of insurance other than invoices for each month. The claimant acknowledged at the hearing that the doctor verbally told her she did not need to provide invoices by the following Monday but she feared that if she signed the document it would take precedence over any verbal instructions and that she would be held to the written document.
So after the part where it says I left to print out my bank statement, ( which I wanted to enter as an exhibit but the officer said there was no point because it did not have my medical insurance deduction on it. I was aware of that but I was not aware of that at the time. After I printed off my bank statement I went to find a Sharpie to black out everything but my medical insurance. As I was looking for the pen I was interrupted by the office manager to sign this paper in which I had stated I just talked to the doctor and he said I can just give him my bank statement. She had stated that's not what he said to me and so we went back into the room to talk to him again. It was only until I was looking for this bank statement to present in this hearing that I recognize I printed off the wrong statement. I recently switched the automatic withdrawal to a different account because the bank card it came off of expired and I had this new bankcard handy when updating the info . But I still wanted to enter this as an exhibit because it showed the date that I printed it which was that Friday. I even wanted to call a witness who saw me printing it and asked me what I was doing but the hearing officer said that that was not necessary because no one disbelieved I went to print out a bank statement) is basically when she got the rest of the story wrong .
To me this is very nonstandard. If the employer gave you the $500/mo, and is now requiring that you provide proof of how it was spent, I'd personally go down the path that it was a "substantial change to the employment arrangement."
With a "substantial change" argument, whether it's decided that you quit, you have a good shot at it being a good cause quit or if it's a discharge, it can't be misconduct because you don't have to accept adverse changes to your terms and conditions of employment or forfeit your rights to unemployment benefits.
This is a legit fear. It's "Judge Judy" 101. You can't modify a written contract verbally. If the Dr. was willing to change it, he should have printed out a new one. You don't have to do it.
This whole thing just smells so wrong. Appeal it, and hope that the next judge at the board of review sees it correctly. Just remember that "insubordination" is not always misconduct. If the employer brought you a piece of paper to sign saying that you agreed to work for less than minimum wage, it wouldn't be enforceable, and normally an employer can't just make deductions from your paycheck or make you agree to such an arrangement. I think your hearing officer was way out in left field.
With a "substantial change" argument, whether it's decided that you quit, you have a good shot at it being a good cause quit or if it's a discharge, it can't be misconduct because you don't have to accept adverse changes to your terms and conditions of employment or forfeit your rights to unemployment benefits.
This is a legit fear. It's "Judge Judy" 101. You can't modify a written contract verbally. If the Dr. was willing to change it, he should have printed out a new one. You don't have to do it.
This whole thing just smells so wrong. Appeal it, and hope that the next judge at the board of review sees it correctly. Just remember that "insubordination" is not always misconduct. If the employer brought you a piece of paper to sign saying that you agreed to work for less than minimum wage, it wouldn't be enforceable, and normally an employer can't just make deductions from your paycheck or make you agree to such an arrangement. I think your hearing officer was way out in left field.
Thank you. I also, throughout the hearing, showed all the errors in his testimony you know to show he was lying about the majority of what happened that day and her response to me was "im not concerned about the exact days or where people were or who was where. I'm just trying to find out if you quit or were discharged." I really appreciate your thoughts on this. Thanks again.