CA EDD claim denial

[DonB]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Towards the end of June 2016 I was terminated from my job so like most would do I filed for unemployment. Yesterday I received a "NOTICE OF DETERMINATION" and it said I was not eligible to receive benefits. The letter reads as follows:

You are not eligible to receive benefits under California Unemployment Insurance Code 1256 beginning on 06/26/2016 and continuing until you return to work after the disqualifying act and earn $2250.00 or more in bona fide employment, and you contact the above office to reopen your claim.

You were discharged from your last job with XXXXX Inc. because you broke a reasonable employer rule. After considering the available information, the department finds that you do not meet the legal requirements for payment of benefits. Section 1256 provides- An individual is disqualified if the department finds he voluntarily quit his most recent work without good cause or was discharged for misconduct from his most recent work. Section 1260A provides- An individual disqualified under Section 1256 is disqualified until he/she, subsequent to the disqualifying act, performs bona fide employment for which he/she receives remuneration equal to or in excess of five times his or her weekly benefit amount.

I am planning on filing a appeal but would like to ask for for guidance on the matter given the above explanation of decision. I've mad two other unemployment claims over the past 30 years and in both previous instances claims were approved and paid having done nothing more than filed. This time I did have a phone interview with a CA EDD representative and had been awaiting the determination. Last week I received a letter that required me to supply some documents to verify my identity. I supplied the EDD with a copy of my CDL, my most recent Social Security Statement, and my W2 for 2015 (all items were on the list of acceptable documents). And having received the denial letter yesterday brings us to where we are today.

I thank anyone in advance who might be able to offer some advice.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Towards the end of June 2016 I was terminated from my job so like most would do I filed for unemployment. Yesterday I received a "NOTICE OF DETERMINATION" and it said I was not eligible to receive benefits. The letter reads as follows:

You are not eligible to receive benefits under California Unemployment Insurance Code 1256 beginning on 06/26/2016 and continuing until you return to work after the disqualifying act and earn $2250.00 or more in bona fide employment, and you contact the above office to reopen your claim.

You were discharged from your last job with XXXXX Inc. because you broke a reasonable employer rule. After considering the available information, the department finds that you do not meet the legal requirements for payment of benefits. Section 1256 provides- An individual is disqualified if the department finds he voluntarily quit his most recent work without good cause or was discharged for misconduct from his most recent work. Section 1260A provides- An individual disqualified under Section 1256 is disqualified until he/she, subsequent to the disqualifying act, performs bona fide employment for which he/she receives remuneration equal to or in excess of five times his or her weekly benefit amount.

I am planning on filing a appeal but would like to ask for for guidance on the matter given the above explanation of decision. I've mad two other unemployment claims over the past 30 years and in both previous instances claims were approved and paid having done nothing more than filed. This time I did have a phone interview with a CA EDD representative and had been awaiting the determination. Last week I received a letter that required me to supply some documents to verify my identity. I supplied the EDD with a copy of my CDL, my most recent Social Security Statement, and my W2 for 2015 (all items were on the list of acceptable documents). And having received the denial letter yesterday brings us to where we are today.

I thank anyone in advance who might be able to offer some advice.

Did you knowingly break a reasonable employer rule?

 

[eerelations]

Yes, what was it your former employer said you did to get fired?

 

[DonB]

I work in the automotive service trade and the auto manufacturer will send clients satisfaction surveys. In May I had changed a few e-mail addresses thus not allowing the client to take the survey. The Service Manager asked me about it, I admitted what I had done, and he said he'll let me know as he needs to speak with HR (this was on a Monday). The next day he said HR replied that I must be terminated, the Service Manager, Parts and Service Director, and the stores General Manager all asked that I not be terminated. After another day, Wednesday, about 4:00pm that day I was called into the Managers office and terminated.
I will also add that in the auto business it's common that the Service Advisor is 100% responsible for the clients service response, every question, directly related to the advisor or not. For example cashier could be having a "bad day" and was perhaps rude to the client. If the response is negative that's on the advisor. In addition the Centers Managements pay is tied to overall customer satisfaction scores to there is always LOTS of pressure to have a perfect score. Management would often "call out" those that were below the stores "benchmark". I don't have issue with that by itself but it was usually done by a group e-mail that went out to all service advisors.

 

[Zigner]

I work in the automotive service trade and the auto manufacturer will send clients satisfaction surveys. In May I had changed a few e-mail addresses thus not allowing the client to take the survey. The Service Manager asked me about it, I admitted what I had done, and he said he'll let me know as he needs to speak with HR (this was on a Monday). The next day he said HR replied that I must be terminated, the Service Manager, Parts and Service Director, and the stores General Manager all asked that I not be terminated. After another day, Wednesday, about 4:00pm that day I was called into the Managers office and terminated.
I will also add that in the auto business it's common that the Service Advisor is 100% responsible for the clients service response, every question, directly related to the advisor or not. For example cashier could be having a "bad day" and was perhaps rude to the client. If the response is negative that's on the advisor. In addition the Centers Managements pay is tied to overall customer satisfaction scores to there is always LOTS of pressure to have a perfect score. Management would often "call out" those that were below the stores "benchmark". I don't have issue with that by itself but it was usually done by a group e-mail that went out to all service advisors.

You falsified the records of your employer in order to make yourself look better...yeah, I can see why you didn't get benefits.

 

[DonB]

You falsified the records of your employer in order to make yourself look better...yeah, I can see why you didn't get benefits.

Thanks for your reply, it wasn't entirely to make myself "look better", maintaining your overall score is/can be a condition of employment. Anyway given the circumstances my decisions to appeal or not is what I'm concerned with. My initial thought is I should file as I'd have nothing to loose doing so and if I file what my best approach might be. Was what I did dumb? Of course it was but I would never have thought it would lead to my being fired. During the exit interview and paperwork process the explanation I was given that the company had terminated other employee's for the same offense and therefore in my case had no choice but to terminate.

 

[Zigner]

...it wasn't entirely to make myself "look better", maintaining your overall score is/can be a condition of employment.

That's EXACTLY what it was...you wanted to look better so you wouldn't be fired. How'd that work out?

In any case, go ahead and appeal. There's no downside. Just state that you want to appeal the ruling, you don't need to give a reason why.

 

[DonB]

Can someone please comment/clarify this from the original post:

You are not eligible to receive benefits under California Unemployment Insurance Code 1256 beginning on 06/26/2016 and continuing until you return to work after the disqualifying act and earn $2250.00 or more in bona fide employment, and you contact the above office to reopen your claim.

I don't really understand what getting back to work and earning $2250 has to do with reopening the claim? Again, thanks for the comments and help.

 

[cbg]

You have been denied benefits for this termination. However, your claim remains open for a year. If you go back to work, earn at least $2250, and then lose that job and it is still within a year of when you filed this time, you can apply for benefits again based on the reason you lose THAT job.

You have nothing to lose by appealing; however, I am not surprised you were denied and approval on appeal is by no means guaranteed.

 

[DonB]

You have been denied benefits for this termination. However, your claim remains open for a year. If you go back to work, earn at least $2250, and then lose that job and it is still within a year of when you filed this time, you can apply for benefits again based on the reason you lose THAT job.

You have nothing to lose by appealing; however, I am not surprised you were denied and approval on appeal is by no means guaranteed.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Before I file an appeal can I find out if the decision for denial was due to information provided by the employer or simply the CA EDD representatives deciding I broke a "reasonable employer rule" as stated in the second paragraph sentence one in the original post? Or must I wait to make that discovery until after I file the appeal.

 

[Chyvan]

Or must I wait to make that discovery until after I file the appeal.

When you appeal it is a REQUEST. "The determination dated mm/dd/yy is wrong. I want an appeal hearing scheduled," is sufficient.

When you get your hearing notice, you'll get a hearing packet with about 20 pages that will include what the employer submitted if you have a telephone hearing. If it's in-person, then you'll have an address to submit evidence, and that same address is where you can go view the file and quite often walk out with a copy. I recommend going to view the file about 3 days before your hearing. That gives the employer time to submit more information so that you pretty much have everything to review.

 

[eerelations]

The only way the CA EDD reps could have decided you broke a rule is because your former employer told them so.

 

[cbg]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Before I file an appeal can I find out if the decision for denial was due to information provided by the employer or simply the CA EDD representatives deciding I broke a "reasonable employer rule" as stated in the second paragraph sentence one in the original post? Or must I wait to make that discovery until after I file the appeal.

Why do you think it matters?

 

[Chyvan]

The only way the CA EDD reps could have decided you broke a rule is because your former employer told them so.

That's not entirely true. They can also do it by what comes out of the claimant's own mouth or what they wrote on their application for UI.

 

[DonB]

Why do you think it matters?

Its not that I think it matters, I'm just wanting to understand the process as clearly as I can. I look at things that happen in my life as an opportunity, good or bad, to learn and become better versed in how things work. Which is why I assume a forum such as this exists in the first place. As for the facts as stated by those seeking advice I'm sure some is 100% truthful and others not so much. Those that reply with advice are doing so based in what information is provided.