• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Two-state unemployment benefit questions

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Chyvan

Member
Before you listen to justalayman or commentator's like vote from a state with a brutal UI formula, do the math yourself to see what you'll get. From your story, you should have been doing the math back in Nov, 2018. Waiting until now, isn't doing you any favors.

https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/pdf/uilawcompar/2018/monetary.pdf

From page 3-11. OH only requires $17,720 in 20 weeks for max weekly benefit. If you apply today, and from your story, you have wages from OH from Oct, 2017 to Jun, 2018 to work with for an OH claim. That's way more than 20 weeks. https://jfs.ohio.gov/unemp_comp_faq/faq_elig_definitions4.stm you can use this to do all the math. From this, you are guaranteed no less than 26 weeks of benefits at some formula for your average weekly wage. You fully qualify for an OH claim without burning up a bunch of quarters of wages for something that does you no good or puts probably very little extra money in your pocket, or really shrinks down the total weeks of UI available to you if you have trouble holding on to a job. You do NOT have to do a combined-wage claim if you don't want to.

Then in 26 weeks of UI from UI, all your TX wages will have aged into the base period (july 2018 to Nov 2018). Then you use the formula on 3-12. You'll take 1/25 of your July to Sept quarter because it's most assuredly the high wage quarter, so that determines your weekly benefit amount. Then you drop down to page 3-23. In this regard, TX isn't that great, and you didn't provide any numbers, so it's pretty clear that what looks to be about 20 weeks of TX wages is probably only getting you about 5 weeks of benefits.

Now, you do you do the math: 26 weeks of UI from OH + 5 weeks from TX at what could be a higher rate that you can calculate

OR

You throw the dice with a combined-wage claim, and see what happens. Once you go this route, the wages in your base period quarters will be consumed. If you end up getting a job shortly and keep it, you'll be glad you took the highest benefit possible. If you end up going on and off because you have trouble holding a job, you might find that you can't qualify for a 2nd-year claim because you burned up all your wages and your combined-wage claim expired.

You really need a crystal ball to make the best choice, but put some thought into it before you just race out and file without doing some prep work.
 


justalayman

Senior Member
Before you listen to justalayman or commentator's like vote from a state with a brutal UI formula, do the math yourself to see what you'll get. From your story, you should have been doing the math back in Nov, 2018. Waiting until now, isn't doing you any favors.

https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/pdf/uilawcompar/2018/monetary.pdf

From page 3-11. OH only requires $17,720 in 20 weeks for max weekly benefit. If you apply today, and from your story, you have wages from OH from Oct, 2017 to Jun, 2018 to work with for an OH claim. That's way more than 20 weeks. https://jfs.ohio.gov/unemp_comp_faq/faq_elig_definitions4.stm you can use this to do all the math. From this, you are guaranteed no less than 26 weeks of benefits at some formula for your average weekly wage. You fully qualify for an OH claim without burning up a bunch of quarters of wages for something that does you no good or puts probably very little extra money in your pocket, or really shrinks down the total weeks of UI available to you if you have trouble holding on to a job. You do NOT have to do a combined-wage claim if you don't want to.

Then in 26 weeks of UI from UI, all your TX wages will have aged into the base period (july 2018 to Nov 2018). Then you use the formula on 3-12. You'll take 1/25 of your July to Sept quarter because it's most assuredly the high wage quarter, so that determines your weekly benefit amount. Then you drop down to page 3-23. In this regard, TX isn't that great, and you didn't provide any numbers, so it's pretty clear that what looks to be about 20 weeks of TX wages is probably only getting you about 5 weeks of benefits.

Now, you do you do the math: 26 weeks of UI from OH + 5 weeks from TX at what could be a higher rate that you can calculate

OR

You throw the dice with a combined-wage claim, and see what happens. Once you go this route, the wages in your base period quarters will be consumed. If you end up getting a job shortly and keep it, you'll be glad you took the highest benefit possible. If you end up going on and off because you have trouble holding a job, you might find that you can't qualify for a 2nd-year claim because you burned up all your wages and your combined-wage claim expired.

You really need a crystal ball to make the best choice, but put some thought into it before you just race out and file without doing some prep work.
Well, at least you’ve reduced the amount of claim available from 26 weeks in each state to 26 in one and 5 in Texas.


to “at least 26 weeks benefits (in Ohio)” That is the maximum benefit in any year there are not extended benefits. I don’t know any state that has extended benefits at this time.

You also ignore that the period from July 2018 until oct 2018 will be use by Ohio to establish the benefit amount and pay benefits (which means that period will not be available for Texas UI. That leaves only October and November earnings available for Texas ui and nothing more since the op would be receiving ui benefits until applying for Texas ui). I seriously doubt the op would be eligible for benefits from Texas based on earnings over a 2 month period.

Of course my mind can be changed if you can provide support for your claim that the applicant has a choice as to whether the claim is a combined state claim or not include some earnings during the base period for,the state they are applying in.


you also ignore the statement the op made that the ui folks in Texas said if op makes a claim in Ohio they won’t be eligible for benefits in Texas for one year. (I believe That’s because they would have a benefit period in ohio for one year during which they cannot file another claim in any state.)

You also have the 2nd year benefits issue screwed up. There is no second year of anything. Your benefit period lasts one year. After that year you file a new claim with new eligibility requirements.
 

Chyvan

Member
You also ignore that the period from July 2018 until oct 2018 will be use by Ohio to establish the benefit amount and pay benefits (which means that period will not be available for Texas UI.
OH will NOT use July to Oct unless he asks them to. I'm not ignoring it all, and I have my doubts if one quarter of wages is enough in TX. Usually there is a 1-1/2 times rule on wages so that it takes a minimum of 1-1/2 quarters of wages to get a claim. Either way, the UT rules give him a choice and since those are coming from Federal rules it's unlikely those can have 50 different interpretations for each state.

you also ignore the statement the op made that the ui folks in Texas said if op makes a claim in Ohio they won’t be eligible for benefits in Texas for one year. (I believe That’s because they would have a benefit period in ohio for one year during which they cannot file another claim in any state.)
I suggest you hang out on another website with more UI traffic. I'm not ignoring anything. The question of back-to-back claims comes up a lot especially with people that live and work in NYC and Newark, NJ. I have plenty of experience from people telling their stories of using the older wages and then hitting another state up for more. While you can't get UI from two claims simultaneously, once a claim is exhausted (out of money) long before it expires, you can get a new UI claim from another state. Apparently, it's a lot harder with TX in the mix because they only allow for 27% of BPW wages, but a lot of other states aren't nearly so cheap.

You also have the 2nd year benefits issue screwed up. There is no second year of anything. Your benefit period lasts one year. After that year you file a new claim with new eligibility requirements.
No, I don't. He lost his job in Nov. If he had applied in Nov, he'd have had July to Nov of wages preserved for a 2nd-year claim. Sometimes that really helps people when they get a Christmas help job to get a new pot of money when things aren't working out.

Never ignore the potential for a 2nd-year claim. You don't know what the future holds.

https://www.masslegalservices.org/content/46-combined-wage-claims-interstate-claims

" may choose to file a UI claim in any state in which she had wages during the base period and in which she qualifies for UI under that state’s laws"

That "and" is a pretty tall order, and

https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r994/r994-106.htm

"If he wishes, he has the right to reject a combined-wage claim and file against a state in which he is separately eligible or to cancel the combined wage claim and file no claim."

Unless you've seen or heard of someone hitting the UI lottery (I have) you wouldn't know this stuff. When someone has wages in two states, that claimant needs to be strategic.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Ya lost me on the issue where you point to Utah. If you have covered earnings in a state, you qualify to apply for ui benefits in that state. I work in an industry where people seek work in specific states sometime during the year for the sole purpose of being able to file for benefits in those states when they become unemployed. Heck, until a few years ago didn’t even have to have earnings in their state to be able to apply for Mass benefits. People I know would fly to Mass simply to apply for UI (you had to make initial app in person). Mass has since changed their laws so you have to have some earnings in Mass to be eligible for UI benefits although the requirement is minimal.


But you are ignoring the op’s statement that he was specifically told he cannot file a claim in Texas for one year after he filed an ohio claim. You are applying situation from outside of Texas and states not involving Texas telling the opmwhwt he has been told is incorrect. If you want to dispute what Texas ui has told the op, i suggest you refer to Texas law on the matter . Until that time, I think you need to accept what they told the op.


I also think you need to research Texas law involving eligibility. I can tell you the site you linked does not describe the situation in my state in a manner it applies as written. While the basic statements may be correct, the application is not described In a means the numbers are meaningful



And I have no idea what the ui lottery is so I can’t respond to that statement.
 

Chyvan

Member
But you are ignoring the op’s statement that he was specifically told he cannot file a claim in Texas for one year after he filed an ohio claim.
Like no UI worker has ever given a claimant wrong answers because they didn't understand the situation. I'm rejecting it was the correct answer and should be taken at face value.

If he applies in OH, and rejects combined wage claiming, then he can apply in TX when his OH claim exhausts.

TX said if I applied for Ohio, Ohio would pay based on my Texas salary (twice as much as OH salary),
TX says if you apply (receive?!) benefits from OH, you cannot apply for 1 year with TX.
When you take these two posts together, I'm pretty sure the worker was referring to if the wages are combined, not in just some general sense that you always have to wait a year.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Like no UI worker has ever given a claimant wrong answers because they didn't understand the situation. I'm rejecting it was the correct answer and should be taken at face value.

If he applies in OH, and rejects combined wage claiming, then he can apply in TX when his OH claim exhausts.
So pony up the law proving the informstion incorrect.

Without that you sound a bit arrogant. If you want somebody to take the word of an anonymous poster on an Internet forum over a state employee working in the germane department, well, let’s say they get the benefit of the doubt simply because of who each of you are.
 

Chyvan

Member
It only makes sense. If the TX wages aren't being used, he can use those TX wages until they aged away. Since you think there is a law that says that TX people can't get claims until other state claims are expired, then you should have no trouble finding it and posting it. You're asking me to prove a negative.

I might have actually found something. Not a TX law, but from the Interstate Benefit Payment Plan https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/pdf/istate_agree_bene_payment.pdf

(5) Benefit Rights of Interstate Claimant.
(a) If a claimant files a claim against any State, and it is determined by such State that the claimant has available benefit credits in such State, claims for benefits shall be filed only against that State as long as benefit credits are available in that State. Thereafter, the claimant may file claims against any other State in which there are available benefit credits.

Says nothing about having to wait until the claim expires.
 
Last edited:

justalayman

Senior Member
It only makes sense. If the TX wages aren't being used, he can use those TX wages until they aged away. Since you think there is a law that says that TX people can't get claims until other state claims are expired, then you should have no trouble finding it and posting it. You're asking me to prove a negative.
Making sense is not legal support.

Whether I think there is a law or not is irrelevent. I’m not the one making statements contrary to a state employee who works in the involved department; you are.
 

Chyvan

Member
I’m not the one making statements contrary to a state employee who works in the involved department; you are.
But you are. You think that he can't get a claim from TX if he files in OH for a whole year based on what a UI worker said in a conversation about combining wages. I say that he can get a TX claim before a year provided he does not combine his TX wages with OH, and I provided a snippet from the Interstate Benefit Payment Plan that would support my position.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
But you are. You think that he can't get a claim from TX if he files in OH for a whole year based on what a UI worker said in a conversation about combining wages. I say that he can get a TX claim before a year provided he does not combine his TX wages with OH, and I provided a snippet from the Interstate Benefit Payment Plan that would support my position.
No, I’m not. I am repeating what the op was told by the state employee

Nice attempt at avoiding proving your statements but you have failed
 

Chyvan

Member
https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/pdf/istate_agree_bene_payment.pdf

(5) Benefit Rights of Interstate Claimant.
(a) If a claimant files a claim against any State, and it is determined by such State that the claimant has available benefit credits in such State, claims for benefits shall be filed only against that State as long as benefit credits are available in that State. Thereafter, the claimant may file claims against any other State in which there are available benefit credits.

Says nothing about having to wait until the claim expires.
I proved my point. Now, you have to find where TX has something more restrictive, and it can't be based on some hearsay statement by a UI worker that was taken out of context and expanded to cover a situation that was never intended in the original conversation.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
I proved my point. Now, you have to find where TX has something more restrictive, and it can't be based on some hearsay statement by a UI worker that was taken out of context and expanded to cover a situation that was never intended in the original conversation.
No, I don’t. I’m not making a statement. I’m parroting what the op was told by a person one would expect to be somewhat knowledgable in the subject. You, on the other hand, don’t have that benefit. You are the one making a statement so you’re welcome to prove your statement or alllow others to believe a state worker in a position of knowledge or somebody with a user name that reminds me of a song speaking of the events surrounding the owner of a certain vehicle and an easy woman.

It’s funny how you state the state worker has made conclusions based on facts not known. I guess we discovered who has the FA crystal ball.
 

Chyvan

Member
You are the one making a statement so you’re welcome to prove your statement
I did. From three different sources I showed that a claimant can reject a combined-wage claim and collect from each state individually with no mention of waiting for a different state's existing claim to expire, and you've brought nothing to the table.
 
Sponsored Ad

Top