How does Ohio calculate 'qualifying weeks' to determine monetary eligibility?

[Gear1394]

What is the name of your state? Ohio

I am a part-time or intermittent Federal employee and have been so for the last 10 years or so. I am located in Ohio and all work is done in Ohio. I have worked every quarter for the past 10 years, and almost every week (maybe 2 or 3 missed weeks for all of 2019). When the virus pandemic occurred the program was suspended indefinitely and I was furloughed.

On March 17, I applied for Ohio unemployment, with the following result:

"The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services has DISALLOWED the claimant's application for unemployment compensation benefits dated 03/17/2020. The claimant did not have at least twenty qualifying weeks of employment that was subject to an unemployment compensation law or did not earn an average weekly wage of at least $269 before taxes during the base period 01/01/2019 to 12/31/2020, as required by Section 4141.01(R)(1) of the Ohio Revised Code.This decision is related to qualification for regular UC benefits."

There is no question that I was furloughed. Ohio may have to do a bit of extra work to get my pay records, but they were provided with an SF-8 form to move this process along. I have also provided them with all pay vouchers, W-2, etc. for 2019. The 'base period' of 1/1/2019 through 12/31/2019 is okay. The issue seems to be how they are calculating average weekly wages, to determine monetary eligibility.

My position was simple: for the 20-week continuous period, starting with Pay Date 8/15/2019 continuing through Pay Date 12/19/2019 I had gross pay before taxes of $5,400, which works out to an average weekly wage of $270 for the 20-week period. I can easily support this. FWIW, I also have 20 individual weeks in 2019 in which earnings were greater than $269.00, but I did not think this was the standard.

I think ODJFS simply used annual wages, divided the amount by 52 and said "Monetarily Ineligible" or something similar. Or, is there some other standard I must meet, in addition to the "twenty qualifying weeks of employment"? If there is an unemployment computation guru in this forum, please help!

Thanks.

------- addendum ------

If it matters in the calculation, gross wages before taxes for 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters, 2019 are as follows: $2866, $2004, $2564 and $3834. Total gross for 2019: $11,268. First quarter 2020 was never completed, but if complete it would probably be about the same as first quarter 2019.

 

[commentator]

If you want to argue with Ohio unemployment compensation about the way the monetary eligibility is determined on an Ohio claim, you'll have to do it with them. They wrote it, they'll interpret it. They have a whole group of people who spend their time doing just that. Your contentions, arguments, etc. may or may not hold any water. From outside, its impossible to tell. When you filed this claim, and you received the decision that you were monetarily ineligible, you did appeal this decision, correct? Sometimes, calculation of monetary eligibility requires more than just a cursory look, and being a federal claim, there may be more of a look, more expertise required. In these times of extreme stress on the system, you may require an appeal with a more experienced user of the system. But in all, no one outside the system would be able to help you make some meaningful argument about how the state of Ohio calculates monetary eligibility for unemployment benefits or that they should be calculated a certain way that they don't agree to.

 

[Zigner]

As a Federal employee, did you actually contribute to the Ohio UI system?

EDIT: Never mind.
See https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/unemcomp.asp for more info

 

[commentator]

A federal claim can be filed in any state. They are quite special, in that the wages must be transferred from a federal system to the individual state's wage system before the claim can be set up, and there are very specific qualifications and guidelines associated with "X" claims as they are referred to in all states. In whatever state you choose to file, the federal wage records are transferred to the state system, and the claim is set up as and based as though if was a regular "that state" claim, subject to their laws and ways of calculating information.

It is possible that the claim was filed, and came up, as it usually does, as an ineligible claim based on Ohio wages only, and no one picked up on that it was a federal claim. Even if you were given something special by your employer to file with it. There are a lot of inexperienced staff out there right now. So hopefully, if there is any possible redetermination of their first decision based on your federal wages, an appeal of the initial monetary determination should bring this about.

 

[Gear1394]

If you want to argue with Ohio unemployment compensation about the way the monetary eligibility is determined on an Ohio claim, you'll have to do it with them. They wrote it, they'll interpret it.

Yes, I appealed and may do so again. The first appeal is simply a request for reconsideration. There is a formal appeals process (hearing, etc.) after which you can sue the department. Strangely enough, looking through the local court docket, the ODJFS folks' decisions have been overturned quite often.

As for Ohio ODJFS being the sole judge of this, I suspect that's not the case. Looking back through this forum, there are/were several persons familiar with the calculation process used by Oho and several other states (they seem to use the same scheme). Basically, it is interpreting one one paragraph of the unemployment statute.

When I initially filed, I know they took annual wages and divided that by 52. I also know that was incorrect, but it was all the information they had. Now they have more detailed data and I think they have not seriously re-visited their first ruling on this claim.

 

[commentator]

Quote: "I think they have not seriously re-visited their first ruling on this claim." and "As for Ohio ODJFS being the sole judge of this, I suspect that's not the case."

Most of the appeals that go to hearing stage and certainly to the court stage are about separation issues, not monetary determinations and calculations of eligibility for a claim. Yes, lots of their initial decisions do get appealed and overturned. However, I suspect you'll find very few about what you're appealing. You can certainly ask them to "take another look" at and revisit their first ruling on this claim.

The way they deal with wages used to set up the base period and determine monetary eligibility both for regular claims and for federal claims is not something that gets appealed often or deeply, simply because it is very cut and dried. You are not the first case like this they've had. The local court system is not even going to spend time right now, even many months from now, which is when it would get there, telling an agency they are interpreting their own laws incorrectly. The agency will send their own legal specialists to defend the way they interpret the law. As I said, they have those folks on staff in each state and they decide how they'll set up base periods, determine monetary eligibility.

I cannot, nor would I want to look at your monetary determination and make any sort of pronouncements. From far outside, there may be an issue of "low quarters" in your monetary determination. In other words, they rarely just take weeks of earnings and multiply them times fifty two or anything else to get anything because quarters matter more than weeks or years in their monetary calculations. But sometimes they require that you have sufficient earnings to set up for a claim in at least three of the four quarters used to determine monetary eligibility. They'll have to tell you what this determination means and why it was made based on their records of your earnings.

Yes, we have had some people on this forum who have expressed and claimed great knowledge about how this or that was done in various states. However, though they do have similar "schemes" in each state, since they are based on federal structural guidelines for the program, the way the states calculate monetary eligibility is not something that is open to a lot of interpretation and/or change by laymen. As I said, it is the business of the agency to determine how they follow the law.

If they have rejected your claim after the first appeal, you go can go in on the next appeal and request they re-look at your situation. You can present additional wage records and dates and information at a hearing this time. You can cite the statutes you feel they are not following. Perhaps they will see it differently.

 

[aldaron]

"I am a part-time or intermittent Federal employee and have been so for the last 10 years or so". Maybe the employment status is preventing approval of UI. Never heard of an intermittent employee. Your either regular full time or part time. Maybe a contractor.

 

[commentator]

No, they exist. Intermittently. They're official. But according to my ballpark calculations, this person just doesn't have enough high weeks (over $270) in the quarters used to set up a claim. But if this is the case, his appeal should tell him this. He can also re-apply now and see if the quarter change since March will affect his eligibility.

 

[Chyvan]

Before you start appealing, you need to do CALCULATIONS! With your $270/wk number that you're throwing out, OH might be doing you a huge favor in making you monetarily ineligible so that you can get a PUA claim instead. PUA claims get a minimum UI benefit of 50% of the state's average benefit. To you, that means that $270/wk in earnings might get you the minimum weekly benefit that OH offers, and 50% of the average might be way better.