Unemployment disqualification

[Chyvan]

http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365.htm#QuittoAcceptOfferedSubsequentEmployment

First there's this.

There can be lots of reasons to quit a part-time job and focus on your concurrent full-time job. However, from your story, I don't think that was your intent. I think you KNEW you were getting laid off. You told your part-time job you were quitting to get into CTB. I think you put this in writing and it's documented. I think you will be found out.

Therefore, there's real issues whether the full-time job that had a week left to go was BETTER than the part-time job that you could have kept.

www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365_-_Reason_for_Decision.htm

Therefore you can get a disqualification for "C. VQ to Accept Other Work - Terms and Conditions Not Substantially More Favorable
You quit your last job with (employer name) to accept other employment that was less permanent or did not pay substantially better. After considering available information, the Department finds that you do not meet the legal requirements for payment of benefits."

In this above decision, there's no doubt you worked a new job, BUT until that disqualification is "purged," the reason for separation from your 2nd to last job is still in play.

When you get that kind of disqualification, then you have to deal with http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Miscellaneous_MI_35.htm "VQ and MC are two of the four disqualifications that may have an effective date before the effective date of the claim" "Under the provisions of Section 1260(a), once a VQ or MC disqualification is assessed, the claimant must return to work and earn five times his or her weekly benefit amount in bona fide employment and reopen the claim. The disqualification will remain in effect until the requirements have been met." "A disqualification is purged when certain requirements, called for by the Code, have been accomplished by the claimant. Specific disqualifications may be purged in the following manner:
Sections 1256 (1260[a]) - VQ and MC
A disqualification assessed under Section 1256 may be purged only if the claimant has returned to work in bona fide employment and earned at least five times his or her weekly benefit amount after the act that resulted in the disqualification."

I cant find where it states you have to work 5 weeks between the quit and the lay off.

No one's said this. You have to EARN 5 x WBA. If you make big money, you can do it in a day. If you're working one-day a week for minimum wage, you might never do it before your claim expires.

 

[jason19]

http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365.htm#QuittoAcceptOfferedSubsequentEmployment

First there's this.

There can be lots of reasons to quit a part-time job and focus on your concurrent full-time job. However, from your story, I don't think that was your intent. I think you KNEW you were getting laid off. You told your part-time job you were quitting to get into CTB. I think you put this in writing and it's documented. I think you will be found out.

Therefore, there's real issues whether the full-time job that had a week left to go was BETTER than the part-time job that you could have kept.

www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365_-_Reason_for_Decision.htm

Therefore you can get a disqualification for "C. VQ to Accept Other Work - Terms and Conditions Not Substantially More Favorable
You quit your last job with (employer name) to accept other employment that was less permanent or did not pay substantially better. After considering available information, the Department finds that you do not meet the legal requirements for payment of benefits."

In this above decision, there's no doubt you worked a new job, BUT until that disqualification is "purged," the reason for separation from your 2nd to last job is still in play.

When you get that kind of disqualification, then you have to deal with http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Miscellaneous_MI_35.htm "VQ and MC are two of the four disqualifications that may have an effective date before the effective date of the claim" "Under the provisions of Section 1260(a), once a VQ or MC disqualification is assessed, the claimant must return to work and earn five times his or her weekly benefit amount in bona fide employment and reopen the claim. The disqualification will remain in effect until the requirements have been met." "A disqualification is purged when certain requirements, called for by the Code, have been accomplished by the claimant. Specific disqualifications may be purged in the following manner:
Sections 1256 (1260[a]) - VQ and MC
A disqualification assessed under Section 1256 may be purged only if the claimant has returned to work in bona fide employment and earned at least five times his or her weekly benefit amount after the act that resulted in the disqualification."



No one's said this. You have to EARN 5 x WBA. If you make big money, you can do it in a day. If you're working one-day a week for minimum wage, you might never do it before your claim expires.

I'm sorry. I was referring to what you said about EDD using my part time job where i quit, to assess my eligibility instead of my last job, where i was laid off, because i had not earned 5 x WB between quitting the part time and being laid off at the full time. I've been looking through the links you sent and I cannot find where it says that. All ive seen is where it says the last employer determines eligibility based on the timing of when you filed.

 

[Chyvan]

Think about it. Do you think it's right that you can quit a job, take a new job for a day, and then collect UI because you got laid off? On the surface, the answer is NO, unless the new job meets certain requirements.

I know it's about as clear as mud, but that's the point of the 5 x WBA. It's all over the place, you're just not getting the concept.

 

[jason19]

Think about it. Do you think it's right that you can quit a job, take a new job for a day, and then collect UI because you got laid off? On the surface, the answer is NO, unless the new job meets certain requirements.

I know it's about as clear as mud, but that's the point of the 5 x WBA. It's all over the place, you're just not getting the concept.

I do understand the concept. In your example, that job is not bona fide, temp jobs would not be bona fide according to EDD. They have criteria for what is considered eligible work and there is a whole page on it. I read that part. Neither of these are like my case. Not withstanding I just asked where you got the 5 x wb timing info, since everything i read stated very clearly that the last job determines ui eligibility and i didnt see it on any of the links you sent. Everything else you stated, I could find. I am assuming that you are coming up with this because of the 5 x wb penalty imposed for VQ and MC dq's, which is fine, I can see that. I just wanted to see where Edd states it. Again you might very well be right, I just wanted to see it for myself. Thank you.

 

[Chyvan]

temp jobs would not be bona fide according to EDD.

Temp jobs through agencies are bona fide. Lots of temp works in CA get UI. The issue then becomes is the temp job BETTER than the job you quit to accept it.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

... temp jobs would not be bona fide according to EDD....

That is one of the most wrong things I have ever seen on this forum. Temp agencies pay UI tax just like every other job and the job is just as "bona fide" as any other.

 

[jason19]

That is one of the most wrong things I have ever seen on this forum. Temp agencies pay UI tax just like every other job and the job is just as "bona fide" as any other.

I should not have used the words bona fide. We both agree that person would have trouble getting benefits. Regardless, thats not my situation, I worked the job i was laid off of for over a year. The part time quit was pre planned for school. (I was planning on attending school whether I was laid off or not) and the company laying us off was trying to relocate us somewhere else in the company. Since there is a clear rule that you have to earn 5 x wb between two employers I would think it would be stated somewhere, yes? Please show me how you know that.

 

[Chyvan]

it would be stated somewhere, yes? Please show me how you know that.

http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365.htm#QuittoAcceptOfferedSubsequentEmployment

I've posted it twice, and now three times. 5 x WBA isn't such a stiff requirement that two job separations would come into play, but it happens occasionally like with what you're going through.

You're the one telling the story, and you really keep making it worse.

You quit a part-time job to go to school. That's clearly disqualifying.

You lost a job, BUT you didn't earn 5 x WBA before you got let go, and it sounds like you knew it didn't have much longevity at the time you quit your other job.

Now, you're admitting that you're going to school no matter what, and that complicates UI claims too.

 

[commentator]

This is the world of people who want to stand around and argue with anyone about anything. Almost all employers, including temp services, are bona fide unemployment tax paying employers. Therefore, they pay in employer taxes on everyone who works for them whether it is your only job or your last job or whatever. That you accepted and worked at the job for some period of time makes it acceptable work for you.

When you file a claim, all the wages from all the jobs you have worked at during the base period are pulled in to make up your claim. The employers are ALL charged for part of the unemployment you draw IF you did not leave that job for a disqualifying reason. You quit a job=disqualifying reason. They didn't let you go, you quit them. They will not wish to have their rates raised because of your being able to draw benefits, they will be given the opportunity to protest this. You quit your last job (one of your last jobs)without a very valid job related reason for quitting=no unemployment benefits.

The earnings requirement to make the job be your "most recent" place of employment is a certain amount set up by state law. That's to keep you from working at a job until you get fired from it or quit it, and then going to work for your Uncle Sid at his quickie mart for three days and being given a lack of work lay off, and being cleared to draw benefits.

The employer you quit will have strong feelings against your being able to do this, since the claim will almost all be charged against their employer account, regardless of the fact that you last worked for Uncle Sid.

So the system sets up a minimum earnings at whatever your last job was before it can be considered a true last job. With these two jobs, you'd have to have made a certain amount from the last job you were laid off from since you quit the second job, or you'd have to go back to that job you quit and the reason you quit it.

They'll tell you whether or not you've done this, and they'll be in full contact with BOTH employers, regardless of what you tell them or what you argue or quote law to them about.

If you happen to be working at two jobs, and you quit one of them, and then you are laid off from the other one, they're going to be looking at all the jobs you've worked at lately and your reasons for leaving them. That's all there is to it.

That you quit to insert yourself into school based on a lay off that hadn't happened yet, I don't fully understand, I don't think you fully understood the parameters of retraining programs, and you certainly do not understand the workings of unemployment law.

It's not necessary that you understand it or that somebody quote you the absolute statute chapter and verse of where it says this or that regarding your unemployment benefits. You're not going to re-invent the wheel here.

The things you've done, quitting and earning and going to school, you've already done them. The unemployment system will decide what your last job is, and how they're going to treat it without your input and argument.

 

[jason19]

This is the world of people who want to stand around and argue with anyone about anything. Almost all employers, including temp services, are bona fide unemployment tax paying employers. Therefore, they pay in employer taxes on everyone who works for them whether it is your only job or your last job or whatever. That you accepted and worked at the job for some period of time makes it acceptable work for you.

When you file a claim, all the wages from all the jobs you have worked at during the base period are pulled in to make up your claim. The employers are ALL charged for part of the unemployment you draw IF you did not leave that job for a disqualifying reason. You quit a job=disqualifying reason. They didn't let you go, you quit them. They will not wish to have their rates raised because of your being able to draw benefits, they will be given the opportunity to protest this. You quit your last job (one of your last jobs)without a very valid job related reason for quitting=no unemployment benefits.

The earnings requirement to make the job be your "most recent" place of employment is a certain amount set up by state law. That's to keep you from working at a job until you get fired from it or quit it, and then going to work for your Uncle Sid at his quickie mart for three days and being given a lack of work lay off, and being cleared to draw benefits.

The employer you quit will have strong feelings against your being able to do this, since the claim will almost all be charged against their employer account, regardless of the fact that you last worked for Uncle Sid.

So the system sets up a minimum earnings at whatever your last job was before it can be considered a true last job. With these two jobs, you'd have to have made a certain amount from the last job you were laid off from since you quit the second job, or you'd have to go back to that job you quit and the reason you quit it.

They'll tell you whether or not you've done this, and they'll be in full contact with BOTH employers, regardless of what you tell them or what you argue or quote law to them about.

If you happen to be working at two jobs, and you quit one of them, and then you are laid off from the other one, they're going to be looking at all the jobs you've worked at lately and your reasons for leaving them. That's all there is to it.

That you quit to insert yourself into school based on a lay off that hadn't happened yet, I don't fully understand, I don't think you fully understood the parameters of retraining programs, and you certainly do not understand the workings of unemployment law.

It's not necessary that you understand it or that somebody quote you the absolute statute chapter and verse of where it says this or that regarding your unemployment benefits. You're not going to re-invent the wheel here.

The things you've done, quitting and earning and going to school, you've already done them. The unemployment system will decide what your last job is, and how they're going to treat it without your input and argument.

I'm not arguing with anyone, I was told there was a rule about needing to earn 5 x wb between 2 jobs. I keep being given examples that are not like my situation. All i wanted was to see where that is stated, almost everything that has been told to me on this blog has been proven by a link or a reference. I understand the logic but i also understand that the system may not run by your logic, otherwise there would only be one way and all states would run their systems the same exact way. I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to see where that information is taken from. As of yet no one has been able to produce it. In fact reading all the references that Ive been given its been stated several times that VQ and MC dq's are ONLY applied to the last employer, which makes me question even more. I've even learned what states DO count previous previous employment when deciding UI eligibility, CA is not on the list. I'm trying to educate myself. Nothing I've done was done with the intention to be shady, Ive been honest about everything with UI. I realize it can be annoying when people ask questions and push back but there's nothing wrong with it. I've learned a lot here and I appreciate all the education. Thank you

 

[jason19]

http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_365.htm#QuittoAcceptOfferedSubsequentEmployment

I've posted it twice, and now three times. 5 x WBA isn't such a stiff requirement that two job separations would come into play, but it happens occasionally like with what you're going through.

You're the one telling the story, and you really keep making it worse.

You quit a part-time job to go to school. That's clearly disqualifying.

You lost a job, BUT you didn't earn 5 x WBA before you got let go, and it sounds like you knew it didn't have much longevity at the time you quit your other job.

Now, you're admitting that you're going to school no matter what, and that complicates UI claims too.

Ive always been prepared to go to school and work, that was always the plan. I shouldn't be penalized for not working 2 jobs. i didnt leave one job for another. They were concurrent jobs. Should i get benefits from both, no. Should i get benefits for 1, yes. I would be eligible for benefits even i kept the part time. Quitting to go to school would only be disqualifying if it was my last employer according to all the literature i've seen thus far. On the application for CA ui, it asks you if you plan on going to school, when and if the program is a CTB authorized program(mine is). They ask you when you apply if your interested in CTB. I hope you guys are wrong but whatever happens, happens, well see. Thank you.

 

[Chyvan]

http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Suitable_Work_SW_5.htm#JobOfferMadePriortoFilingaClaim

Maybe this one will help. You can get disqualified on a refusal of work that happens BEFORE you even apply for UI and even when there is intervening employment, AND even when you have part-time work.

I shouldn't be penalized for not working 2 jobs.

Unfortunately, it happens. That's why claimants need to learn this stuff so they can avoid the pitfalls when their UI is at stake.

i didnt leave one job for another. They were concurrent jobs.

You made a choice. The same as the woman in the refusal case. She chose a temp job over a permanent job. CA doesn't care about concurrency.

Should i get benefits for 1, yes. I would be eligible for benefits even i kept the part time.

CA has no provision for this. States like MA and NJ will apply a "constructive deduction." They pretend that you still have the part-time job, and pay partial UI benefits less the amount you would have earned from the part-time job provided you hadn't quit it. That's rare though.

Quitting to go to school would only be disqualifying if it was my last employer

Quitting a perfectly good job to keep a job that results in a lay off a week later is also disqualifying when you don't do it correctly. Besides that, I'm not so sure it was a clean lay off. You say this:

the company laying us off was trying to relocate us somewhere else in the company.

That sounds like there may be a http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_440.htm#Transfer and a potential refusal of suitable work.

We've beat this topic to death. Wait on the decision. EDD just pays the money so if you start getting benefits, then you avoided a huge mess. They don't send a letter telling you why you are getting benefits. If you get denied, you'll get a letter telling you why.