appeal UI determination - 'willful disegard'

[willowohio]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? OHIO
I would like advice on submitting an appeal and requesting a hearing to try to obtain UI benefits. Below is the initial determination and appeal response as well as background information.

My claim was disallowed on 3/26 'due to a disqualifying separation' with the following determination:

The employer discharged the claimant for violating a company rule. Evidence supports negligence or willful disregard of the rule on the part of the claimant. Evidence also allows that violating the rule was in connection with the work, did materially and substantially affect the employer's interest, and that the rule was reasonable, known and uniformly enforced. Ohio's legal standard that determines if a discharge is with just cause is whether the claimant's acts, omissions, or course of conduct were such that an ordinary person would find the discharge justifiable. After a review of the facts, this agency finds that the claimant was discharged with just cause under Section 4141.29(D)(2)(a), Ohio Revised Code.​

I immediately submitted an appeal with the following statement:

The finding indicates "Evidence also allows that violating the rule was in connection with the work, did materially and substantially affect the employer's interest, and that the rule was reasonable, known and uniformly enforced."
This is not accurate. Violation of the rule had no impact to the employer's interest and had no impact on job performance or the work environment. The rule is not reasonable and infringes on ones personal life and matters that should not be a matter regulated by the employer. The incident was a mutual loan between friends from their own personal finances and NOT the employer.
And finally, the other involved party(s) were not terminated but instead received a 30 day written warning and an opportunity to correct the behavior.​

Below is the determination received 4/17 from my appeal request:

The employer discharged the claimant for violating a company rule. Evidence supports negligence or willful disregard of the rule on the part of the claimant. Evidence also allows that violating the rule was in connection with the work, did materially and substantially affect the employer's interest, and that the rule was reasonable, known and uniformly enforced. Ohio's legal standard that determines if a discharge is with just cause is whether the claimant's acts, omissions, or course of conduct were such that an ordinary person would find the discharge justifiable. After a review of the facts, this agency finds that the claimant was discharged with just cause under Section 4141.29(D)(2)(a), Ohio Revised Code.
​

Background:
The rule that was violated dealt with personal finances and is covered in the company code of conduct:

The following excerpt is the item that was in violation:
�You may not borrow money (other than nominal amounts) from or lend money to or act as guarantor, co-signer or surety for customers, suppliers or other employees.
The Code goes on to say: permissible to borrow from or act as guarantor, co-signer or surety for relatives or close personal friends (but not if the friendship grew out of a [company] relationship).​

I was aware of the Code item pertaining to personal borrowing; but the friends (co-workers) that loaned me the funds were my close personal friends. Yes, they were friendships that grew out of our [workplace] relationship; but how can one expect anything else when I literally grew up with the company (I was employed there for 22 years). All of my personal relationships were with wonderful people that I met at the workplace.
The reason for needing the loan(s) was to pay-off a prior 401k loan so I could access additional available funds to remediate a financial burden I was facing as a result of a gambling addiction. The funds for these loan(s) were returned within a 2 week timeframe and the lender was aware of the terms. The final loan, that triggered the investigation and resulted in the termination, was not under the above stated terms and was agreed to be repaid over a period of time.
Each of these loans were conducted out of our personal accounts and had no connection with our work or the company. The company identified the loan as a result of the repayments transactions occurring between two employee accounts, we showed up on a monitoring report. An investigation was opened in December and i attested to the fact that I was aware of the code of conduct item that was in violation.

I have been doing some 'internet research' and since the violation was not an illegal act and did not directly impact my job performance, I don�t believe that it can be grounds for disallowing UI benefits. Any advice that anyone can offer to assist with my next appeal/hearing would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

 

[eerelations]

"Wilful Disregard" (or "wilful misconduct" as it's called in some places) means you deliberately violated a company rule that you were aware of. And you have admitted to doing so. Unless your company code specifies that coworkers who are also close friends are therefore coworkers that you may borrow money from, then your company is within its legal right for knowingly violating the code. The company is legally free to fire you specifically for misconduct, even though your violation did not constitute an illegal act and did not negative impact your job performance.

While this may sound harsh, it is strictly factual. A senior-level UI official named Commentator will be on shortly to explain the above to you in more detail.

 

[willowohio]

additional thought

In my googling, I came across one article that said "if your misconduct occurred months before your employer let you go, you can probably collect unemployment compensation".

There were several exchanges of monies in 2014: 4/23, 4/29, 7/19, 7/21 - those were dates that monies were received into my account from my friend's account.
I was not interviewed by an investigator until December 19th and I was not terminated until March 5th.

 

[willowohio]

not disputing termination; just UI benefits

"Wilful Disregard" (or "wilful misconduct" as it's called in some places) means you deliberately violated a company rule that you were aware of. And you have admitted to doing so. Unless your company code specifies that coworkers who are also close friends are therefore coworkers that you may borrow money from, then your company is within its legal right for knowingly violating the code. The company is legally free to fire you specifically for misconduct, even though your violation did not constitute an illegal act and did not negative impact your job performance.

While this may sound harsh, it is strictly factual. A senior-level UI official named Commentator will be on shortly to explain the above to you in more detail.

I am not disputing the termination. I am simply attempting to get the UI benefits that I believe I am deserving of. The rule was not uniformly enforced as the other involved party received only a 30 day written warning and I am aware of other employees that have loaned money to each other and were not even investigated for their activity.

 

[eerelations]

You're not entitled to UI benefits.

The company did not know about the misconduct until December. The company cannot be held accountable for not firing you for something it didn't yet know about. And the fact that it waited three months to fire you after the investigator spoke to you only means that the company was doing its due diligence to ensure it handled the situation correctly.

Employers aren't legally required to handle wrongdoers in exactly the same manner. The company may have fired you and given your coworker a 30-day warning because you were the one who initiated the loan request and she was only responding. But really, it doesn't matter legally.

Again, you are not entitled to UI benefits. And understand you are arguing with someone who has 30 years' work experience in this area. (And when Commentator responds, she will say pretty much the same thing as me, and she has even more experience!)

 

[commentator]

Okay, commentator here is having serious trouble figuring out where you are in the appeals process. Have you had an in person or by telephone hearing yet? You were denied initially, right? And then you submitted your appeal containing all this stuff you quoted to us, in which you basically disagreed with the decision to deny benefits. And then you were given a hearing, or you just received this second decision?

If this is the case, and the last thing you say that the appeals response was, then you have only one appeal left, that to the board of review. There will probably be someone here along soon who will tell you that its totally possible to win in the board of review, because they did, once, in another state. Perhaps they will have some arguments that you can present to further your case or improve your appeals chances. The board of review hearing is pretty much to make sure the law has been followed. Unless you have some kind of new and compelling evidence, rehashing the same old stuff "It was--was not!" "Did it!--Did not!" is not going to make much difference.

And frankly, I am not seeing much at all that does not tell me you were fired for good cause. You can "internet research" till the cows come home, but the truth of the matter is, you're not going to come up with any case law for the unemployment system that the people who work within that system are not aware of.

It's legal , even if it's not illegal. he company can have a rule that you are not to walk out the left front door. It is not illegal and does no one any harm, does not hinder production if you were to. But they had the rule anyhow. And were you aware of the rule? Yes. The rule was clearly posted, and you had been informed. Did you violate the rule? Yes, you went out the wrong door. You showed willful disregard for the company's rule. They fired you legally, and I don't see any way you can spin that to say you should be granted unemployment insurance. You are not out of work through no fault of your own in this case.

When you throw in all these personal details, like how you didn't have any other friends you could've borrowed from, since you've practically grown up in this company, and that you considered your co workers "dear friends" that doesn't change the fact that they were still co workers. It doesn't matter whether you were friends with them or not. In the best interests of the company, you were going to have to continue to work with them, whether you owed them money, or they owed you money, or you were sleeping with them or their sister anything else that was going on with you personally. It could certainly cause problems in the workplace if you were borrowing or lending money to co workers.

And that you had a gambling addiction you were trying to deal with....were borrowing money from co-workers in violation of company policies to cover these things.....aye yi yah...this is supposed to excuse you?

Quote: "The company identified the loan as a result of the repayments transactions occurring between two employee accounts, we showed up on a monitoring report. An investigation was opened in December and i attested to the fact that I was aware of the code of conduct item that was in violation."
Where, what is the proof you might possibly have that you did not violate a company policy that you were clearly aware of?