PA unemployment compensation issues , thinking ahead.

[HRZ]

Pennsylvania in context of unemployment compensation eligibility .

OP's younger sibling a mere 68 is under repeated questions and demands from her 65 year old boss to
" retire ."

In general to give advance notice of a quit is a quit and employer can accept it immediately and one is ineligible for UC.

However does the same problem exist if one carefully states in writing that I intend to retire effective.
2/ 2 / 2019 and employer chooses to move it up to about now ...has one quit or has one been fired?

This is not about performance or cost saving....it's about age ...for some personal reason , repeated several times boss is unable/unwilling to retire until he has a younger team in place and he has taken various steps to implement same ....but no incentives to "retire " ....small moderate tech firm of about 25 employees and no real retirement plan. Expanding profitable business .

 

[adjusterjack]

However does the same problem exist if one carefully states in writing that I intend to retire effective 2/ 2 / 2019 and employer chooses to move it up to about now ...has one quit or has one been fired?

One would have to be incredibly stupid to give that kind of advance notice to an employer.

But, no, it's not a quit, it's a termination. In fact, UI laws typically allow for benefits from the date of the termination (after the waiting period) to the effective date of the quit.

 

[Whoops2u]

In general to give advance notice of a quit is a quit and employer can accept it immediately and one is ineligible for UC.

I don't think that's quite right. From the Soyster line of cases, one (Walker v. UNEMPL. COMP. BD. OF REVIEW, 27 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 522) has as the rule:
It is the law of Pennsylvania that a resignation, later revoked, is a voluntary termination of employment if the employer has taken steps to replace the employee before revocation. Soyster v. Unemployment Compensation Board, 197 Pa. Superior Ct. 547, 180 A.2d 123 (1962).

However does the same problem exist if one carefully states in writing that I intend to retire effective.
2/ 2 / 2019 and employer chooses to move it up to about now ...has one quit or has one been fired?

In the Walker case, the time certain of leaving because of a "conflict of interest" was a month after the letter. Walker lost. The only reason one can have is a claim of necessitous and compelling nature to leave. So, the fact you set a specific date is not relevant. The fact you gave a specific cause not N&C is not relevant.

If the employer takes steps to replace you after your resignation, you quit.

 

[Chyvan]

In fact, UI laws typically allow for benefits from the date of the termination (after the waiting period) to the effective date of the quit.

No, it doesn't. It's pretty close to a third for each of the three methodologies.

It's a firing if you fire the person before the date of resignation with a wage loss. The claimant can get UI for the full claim (CA) or until the date they'd quit anyway (NY but some have gotten the full claim when they say things just right)
It's a firing if the claimant gives a long notice and the employer fires too soon (2 weeks for AZ and TX, 3 weeks for WA)
A quit's a quit. (NJ and probably all the states in the southeast.)

that a resignation, later revoked, is a voluntary termination of employment if the employer has taken steps to replace the employee before revocation. Soyster v. Unemployment Compensation Board, 197 Pa. Superior Ct. 547, 180 A.2d 123 (1962).

Wrong theory. That is for when a claimant quits, and then begs to unquit.

What HRZ is taking about is when the employer fires you seconds after you submit your letter of resignation. It's a very state specific thing. It's not always possible to find the info unless you can find someone that quit with notice, and was fired, and then says they got UI, and why they got it, or you find it published some where.

For HRZ, there's no reason to quit. If the employer want's the claimant gone, let them fire the person. What could possibly be the advantage to giving 6 months notice and possibly getting cheated out of UI because PA let's an employer accelerate with no penalty. PA has a pretty generous UI system. I wouldn't want to lose out on that because my letter of "resignation" was used against me that shouldn't have been written in the first place.

 

[Whoops2u]

Wrong theory. That is for when a claimant quits, and then begs to unquit.

What HRZ is taking about is when the employer fires you seconds after you submit your letter of resignation. It's a very state specific thing. It's not always possible to find the info unless you can find someone that quit with notice, and was fired, and then says they got UI, and why they got it, or you find it published some where.

Are you saying it would be something like:
By a letter dated December 1, 1974, Walker submitted his resignation, effective December 31, 1974, citing a "conflict of interest in employment" as his reason for leaving. Never fully explained on the record, this "conflict of interest" revolved around domestic problems arising out of Walker's shift assignments and those of his wife at her job. On December 18, 1974, Walker met with his employer and attempted to rescind his resignation. The employer refused to allow the rescission because it had allegedly committed itself to a replacement for Walker.

Because, that's what the case I cited was about.

 

[Chyvan]

Are you saying it would be something like:
By a letter dated December 1, 1974, Walker submitted his resignation, effective December 31, 1974, citing a "conflict of interest in employment" as his reason for leaving. On December 18, 1974, Walker met with his employer and the employer fired him.

We need to know, does PA treat that as a firing so you can get UI or is a quit a quit?

HRZ is asking about a situation like what I changed yours. The quitter doesn't want to undo his resignation, he doesn't want the employer to fire him prior to the last day he wants to work.

 

[Whoops2u]

We need to know, does PA treat that as a firing so you can get UI or is a quit a quit?

HRZ is asking about a situation like what I changed yours. The quitter doesn't want to undo his resignation, he doesn't want the employer to fire him prior to the last day he wants to work.

Assuming, without deciding, that Soyster, supra, requires by implication that an employee be allowed to withdraw a resignation unless the employer has relied on it to his detriment,2 we must still conclude that the appellant is disqualified for benefits.

 

[Chyvan]

No, it's not. The employer did not fire Walker in the case you cited. Walker begged to keep his job. I'm seeing the case for myself, and the situation you posted is about "rescinding a resignation"

Like here https://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_135.htm#WithdrawalofResignation

HRZ is talking about a situation like https://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_135.htm#LeavingPriortoEffectiveTime

"When the employer separates a claimant prior to the effective date of a previously announced voluntary leaving, the separation becomes a discharge if the claimant suffers a wage loss.


In P-B-39, the claimant gave notice on October 24 that she was quitting effective November 15. The employer permitted her to work only until October 31. The Board held that the claimant was discharged and said:


. . . the claimant was not permitted to work to the effective date of her resignation and the employer did not pay the claimant her wages through that date. The claimant did suffer a wage loss by the action of the employer in accelerating the last day of work.

On the other hand, if the employer continues paying the claimant's wages through the announced leaving date, the separation remains a voluntary quit. For example, in P-B-27 the claimant notified the employer on December 21 that she was quitting at month's end. The employer separated the claimant on December 26 but paid her wages through the end of the month. In holding that the claimant voluntarily quit, the Board said:


Although the claimant stopped working prior to the effective date of her resignation, the employer continued her wages through that date. The claimant was paid wages for not working and suffered no loss by the action of the employer in accelerating the last day to work . . . ."

 

[eerelations]

Bottom line is, if your friend gives her employer a resignation date of Y and her employer lets her go sometime sooner, on X, then your friend will be entitled to UI benefits for the period between X and Y - as long as her employer doesn't pay her during the period between X and Y.

 

[Chyvan]

if your friend gives her employer a resignation date of Y and her employer lets her go sometime sooner, on X, then your friend will be entitled to UI benefits for the period between X and Y - as long as her employer doesn't pay her during the period between X and Y.

Do you know this specifically for PA? Do you have that in writing? This is not something to guess about.

 

[HRZ]

Issue may arise in Pennsylvania not far more liberal California .

IF person (. Unwisely per most ) tenders a written notice of retirement say 6 months down the road , and employer unilaterally accelerates same wo paying thru the date specified ...is it a quit in context of a likely disqualification for UC or is it a firing ?

I think there are enough direct boss's demands to retire and hiring of younger staff now in training to take over older workers duties to raise big red age discrimination flags but those muddy waters are best in a separate post

 

[HRZ]

Sorry I missed an interim post.

IVe tried searching the PA UC sites but no luck with anything on point ...probably missed the obvious ...a retirement is a sub class of of a quit ?

 

[Chyvan]

Retiring is a quit. It might even be worse than a quit because lets say that the reason for quitting would be with good cause. If you retire, then that might suggest to a UI worker that you were removing yourself from the labor market. Then instead of a "good cause" quit or a nondisqualifying "firing," you raise an able and available issue.

What is the benefit of resigning 6 months in advance? If there's no good reason, then don't do it.

 

[eerelations]

Do you know this specifically for PA? Do you have that in writing? This is not something to guess about.

If someone gives six months' notice of retiring, it's fairly obvious that this person wants (and expects) to work for the next six months. If said person is fired any time during the six-month period, then said person should be entitled to UI benefits (absent things like willful misconduct and so on) during the pre-retirement notice period...unless person's employer continues to pay said person during the retirement notice period. Most UI officials understand this, after all, this is what they do.

 

[Chyvan]

This is not universal for all states. If you don't have this for PA, then it's high risk to suggest it. You need to have it in writing or from some that's lived it.