UI Appeal - Vol Quit, in AZ

HRQ

An employee gave written advance notice of voluntary resignation. We chose to accept her resignation immediately rather than have her work the two weeks, due to slow business.

Employee filed for unemployment, claimed she was fired, initial determination was in her favor.

I filed an appeal, sent copy of written resignation, indicated that we accepted the resignation immediately.

I just received noticed that my request for reconsideration has been denied and I will be notified of the date of the appeal hearing.

Is an appeal hearing typical for this type of situation? I learned somewhere that the ee will typically win benefits for the period of time they were willing and able to work that we did not allow them to work. Otherwise she shouldn't be eligible for benefits due to vol quit, should she?

I have not found any training seminars related to UI and am learning as I go. Your input is appreciated!

cthr

I am not familiar with AZ law, but by terminating her immediately you may have invoked that ready and able to work caveat. Is it your general rule that employees give two weeks notice, how have you handled other situations?

Crout

By letting her go early you negated her resignation.

mwild31

Appeal hearings are usually generated when the parties disagree with what happened and the solution (i.e. employee wants UI and the company doesn't agree). I think you probably ran into problems when you accepted the resignation immediately, rather than allowing her to work the two weeks. In this type of situation, I do one of two things, let the employee work the two weeks or pay them up to the resignation date. Go to the hearing, present your information, hear what the employee has to say & then wait for the final determination by the judge. If nothing else, it will put concrete examples in place on why not to let someone go earlier than their resignation date. Have fun!

LindaS

Agree with both. By deciding not to allow her to work her last two weeks (asssuming that is what the time frame was), and not paying her for that timeframe, you terminated her thereby allowing her UI benefits. Although you can't go back and change the past going forward I would recommend that if you choose to not allow the employee to work the timeframe after they give their notice, paying them for that time would (probably) make them ineligible for benefits.

Rob S

I am in Arizona too, but I have not been in your exact situation before. The good thing is that Arizona is somewhat employer friendly (at least in my encounters). I have only had 3 or 4 UI hearings, but all have come out in our favor (even when the initial ruling was against us).

Good luck. Please let us know how things come out.

Rob

Hunter1

Interesting discussion. Just this morning, we had an employee submit this resignation: "I ... will terminate my employment with the City on Sept 25th, or earlier if agreed on." Employee met with supervisor and they decided that immediate would be preferable. On the same piece of paper, ee changed his termination date to 9/11/03. Any potential problems from a hearing examiner???

LindaS

Hunter, I am in WI also and do not see any potential problems regarding the change of date unless the ex-employee states that they were "forced" to make the change. An administrative law judge would consider that a voluntary termination and as long as they are extenuating circumstances, they wouldn't be eligible for UI benefits.

ritaanz

I have been in a similar situation. My employee gave me 2 weeks notice, which we GLADLY accepted. After the first week of notice, we were considering paying him for the second week and cutting him loose. That Friday of the first week, he comes into my office and changes his notice from 2 weeks to 6 months. Yes 6 months. I thanked you for his generocity but told him it was not necessary, gave him a check for 1 week's pay and send him on hie merry way.

Of course he files for unemployment, I explain the circumstances and golly gee he gets to collect. The state, in effect, said that I terminated him because I had not paid him for his entire notice period. What makes it worse is that I later find out that his family was leaving on an extended vacation (driving cross country in a RV) and he wanted to join them. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Pork

I would certainly appeal that decision, His first resignation is on file and processed. His right to change his mind and give a six month notice is questionable! What would un-employment say if you allowed him to change his mind but sent him home waiting to be called for work when his replacement person is sick and now you need him to come to work, he is still employed but on a personal leave of absence traveling arounfd the country in the RV?

PORK

ritaanz

Sir Pork: As I said,I later found out. It was too late to file an appeal. How's the piglets? Can you see them from your office window?

System

In my state, under your scenario: If I cut the guy loose and pay him his two week period of notice, he will not draw unemployment insurance. If I cut him loose and do not pay him for the period of the notice, he can draw 26 weeks unless he does in fact report to another job, which delays his claim and continues his benefit year. If I cut him loose and pay him one week, instead of two and tell him adios, he files for the unpaid week and draws 26 weeks unless another job is started which, again, delays his claim until he files again in the same benefit year. Whether or not an employee might draw unemployment insurance is never a reason for an employer to feel hogtied into retaining a slacker or a (insert your own word here) through a period of notice.

It's always a surprise when you get a notice indicating you are a chargeable employer in the base period of John Doe and your records reflect he quit a year ago. It happens frequently. They actually pay little robotic people in concrete buildings to sharpen pencils and push buttons to maneuver us into these predicaments.

Leslie

ritaanz, I feel your pain. My favorite is the employee who self terminates on absence progressive discipline. 35 days absent in the past year, and we pay unemployment because they come up with a doctor's note, that you've never seen of course, and the judge rules the last absence was out of their control xx(.

Rob, are your hearings in Phoenix? If so I need the names of the judges who you have found to be pro-employer!

Hunter1

Don't know if other states are like this or not, but what really frosts me in WI is part-time employees: If we employ a part-timer, and we do this a lot, and the person gets laid off from their full time job, we pay a proportionate share of his/her UC in comparison to the wages earned during the qualifying period. This happens even if we continue to employ the person on the same basis as always!! And, we pay on a reimbursment basis, so it results in a bill.