Unemployment Hearing

[semitran]

What is the name of your state? Montana

Hello,

I have a hearing on my benefits due to a work refusal. I did refuse this job on the basis that I had previously worked for the company for which I was offered work, and that the supervisor there is harsh and abrasive and created a hostile work environment. I have witnessess to coraberate this fact. My question is, for anyone familiar with the agencies rules governing this sort of thing, is this a valid reason for refusing work and what evidence do I need to present to prove it?

Also, any advice in general on how to conduct myself during the hearing, or anything I can use to gain an advantage would be appreciated. Last point.. there is some testimony from a witness that I wish to submit who cannot appear for the hearing. How can I submit this testimony? Something like a sworn statement? If so, how would I go about getting one?

Thanks,

semitran

 

[cbg]

Before I comment, I'd like to know what your definition of a hostile work environment it. Many, many people think it means something completely different than it actually means under the law, and whether I think you had "good cause to quit" will depend on whether you are using the term correctly or not.

 

[semitran]

Hostile Work Environment

I am not sure of the legal definition. And to clarify, I am not asking whether I had cause to quit. I am asking whether I had cause to refuse work with the company based on my previous unpleasant experiences with them.

The supervisor in question would often degrade my knowledge and skills in front of other coworkers, and refer to me as a monkey or other pet names. This was portrayed as humorous, but was more insulting than humor, done as a bully might in grade school. He would continually critisize my work, even when there was nothing wrong, and he would often give orders and forget what he had told me, then critisize me for doing it. He would shout and swear. He used degrading language to speak about women and minorities. He would bark out orders like I was a dog and he was my master, and needed to be constantly informed of my progress and location. In short, I was his slave, and treated as such, and being a contractor, I had no rights in the company. I never complained about his behaviour because I had a relative working at the company who would have suffered reprocussions. I can get two other people to testify as to his character and the way i was treated.

That about covers it..

Thanks,

semitran

 

[fairisfair]

then why would you have applied to that company again, in the first place??

 

[xylene]

then why would you have applied to that company again, in the first place??

Because he is on unemployment...

Basically they tell you who to apply for, and the OP doesn't fully explain, but you don't even have to apply and then turn down the job for it to be a refusal.

I can't comment on his claim without more information, but i doubt he had any choice in applying (if he wanted to not be counted as a refusal and loose benefits)

 

[cbg]

Based on your reply, this was not a hostile work environment in the legal sense. Because no laws were being violated, refusal of work here would almost certainly be a disqualifier for UI benefits in the states which which I am familiar.

 

[fairisfair]

Because he is on unemployment...

Basically they tell you who to apply for, and the OP doesn't fully explain, but you don't even have to apply and then turn down the job for it to be a refusal.

I can't comment on his claim without more information, but i doubt he had any choice in applying (if he wanted to not be counted as a refusal and loose benefits)

oh, must be different in MT, not that I have spent alot of time on unemployment, but when I was, you only had to show job search information, they didn't tell you where to go or who to see.

 

[xylene]

oh, must be different in MT, not that I have spent alot of time on unemployment, but when I was, you only had to show job search information, they didn't tell you where to go or who to see.

Then you were lucky.

It is no doubt a function of the MT policies, the OPs industry/background, and the number of availible jobs in Montana, which as a state with a smaller population has fewer jobs.

Based on your reply, this was not a hostile work environment in the legal sense. Because no laws were being violated, refusal of work here would almost certainly be a disqualifier for UI benefits in the states which which I am familiar.

His boss called him and other minorities monkeys? Not saying you are worng, I tend to agree with you, and I can understand how that might be ok, but please explain for my sake and more importantly for that of the OP.

 

[cbg]

A boss being a jerk is not illegal. Unless the negative behavior is BECAUSE OF the employee's membership in a group protected by law, it's just someone being a jerk. Name-calling is not, in and of itself, illegal.

I think the company is foolish to allow it but no one asked me whether I approved of what was going on, only if it violated the law.

 

[xylene]

A boss being a jerk is not illegal. Unless the negative behavior is BECAUSE OF the employee's membership in a group protected by law, it's just someone being a jerk. Name-calling is not, in and of itself, illegal.

I think the company is foolish to allow it but no one asked me whether I approved of what was going on, only if it violated the law.

Is calling someone (the OP) a monkey considered a racial slur?

This is by no means a legal test, just an informal one, I call it the: "Would-I-get-my-head-caved-in-with-cresent-wrench-if-I called-my (Afro-American) mechanic-that-in-an-arguement test."

 

[fairisfair]

Is calling someone (the OP) a monkey considered a racial slur?

This is by no means a legal test, just an informal one, I call it the: "Would-I-get-my-head-caved-in-with-cresent-wrench-if-I called-my (Afro-American) mechanic-that-in-an-arguement test."

! please change that to African American, we have already had that discussion on the forum

 

[semitran]

Another question

Based on your reply, this was not a hostile work environment in the legal sense. Because no laws were being violated, refusal of work here would almost certainly be a disqualifier for UI benefits in the states which which I am familiar.

cbq, i can understand how that may not fit the legal definition of a hostile work environment. How about just plain old emotional distress? Being openly degraded in front of your peers is traumatic, and I had endure an undue amount of stress every day because of it. Forcing someone to work for a company which has caused them emotional harm seems like a very unsound policy to me. There has got to be some sort of provision which allows for a refusal based on these grounds. Can you think of anything that may support this?

And remember, I have two other people (and possibly more) willing to testify to this and worse about the mans character.

Thanks

 

[cbg]

I'm sorry, but I still don't see any way that refusing work is not going to be a disqualifying for benefits. You don't know if the same guy is even still there, whether you would be placed near him, or whether since you were last there something has transpired and he has straightened up. Refusal of work is a disqualifier in most if not all states; it doesn't say, refusal of work because you think something unpleasant may happen.

And xylene; I refuse to make any assumptions about what race any given poster may be. Monkey is not in and of itself a racial slur.

 

[moburkes]

! please change that to African American, we have already had that discussion on the forum

Dang, you beat me!