U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-16-2010, 12:29 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
14,431 posts, read 19,350,256 times
Reputation: 6921

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by antrob View Post
Just to update my situation, EDD is still giving me the run around and not paying me my higher benefit amount. The lady I talked to today even denied a law was pass, I had to speak to her supervisor.

I have emailed all the local TV station in my area and the two major newspapers in my area. I also emailed my congresswoman Laura Richardson and I have emailed the ACLU.

I hope something comes from this. I can't believe a statew can go against a federal law and get away with it.
In your and any similar cases, I would definitely file an appeal. Print out and attach to this appeal HR4213 at this link and highlight the pertinent language and state HR4213 as the reason for the appeal:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...213enr.txt.pdf

I wonder if a class action suit against the State of California on behalf of all aggrieved unemployed people affected would be in order. Even a threat of same. Here is where newspapers and TV stations can be useful. Send/fax/email copies of this legislation to all of them and continue to do so several times a week until somebody pays attention. Follow up with phone calls.

Also, someone needs to contact an employment law attorney about this. If you don't trust California lawyers, perhaps an attorney from another state who is licensed to practice in California.

California is in violation of its fiduciary duty to the unemployed when it is incapable of or refuses to follow federal directives on federal money it is distributing.

Last, but not least. Have you contacted your governor or his wife about this blatant disregard for the rights of the unemployed? Maria Shriver is a Kennedy, after all. He just might pay attention, if she became aware of the issue.

Last edited by Ariadne22; 09-16-2010 at 12:43 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-16-2010, 07:32 PM
 
40 posts, read 114,105 times
Reputation: 26
Another Update regarding my situation. I received another E mail from EDD today that is once again denying that my benefit amount should of not been reduced.

Here was my first response: And here was their response
[SIZE=3]I sent you a question last week my reference number is 3534780. You guys replied back saying the issue was resolved over the phone. This issue was not resolved over the phone and I'm still waiting for a satisfactory outcome. EDD is in violation of federal law by reducing my benefit amount and I'm asking that it be restored to the higher amount immediately. If there are no procedure's in place to change it, someone needs to do it manually. By keeping my benefit amount at the reduced amount, EDD is knowing violating federal law. Please follow the federal law and restore my benefit amount to $300 a week. Thank You.
[/SIZE]
And here was their response:
[SIZE=3]
We did not violated the federal law. You were on the extension and the claim expired, you need it to file a new claim. If you are eligible for the new claim regardless of the weekly benefit amount you have to continue with the new claim, this is a requirement of the Federal law. We are not going to put you back on the extension, you will be on the new claim... You weekly benefit amount is base on the highest quarter, since you did work that much that's why your benefit is low. [/SIZE]

I start to wonder if EDD is just completely clueless. I just sent them this response:
I'm responding to the answer you gave me from my last question, my reference number is 3552143.

The person who responded to my answer is obviously not aware of the law the president Barack Obama signed into law on July 22, 2010. The law he signed had a provision in it that would protect me from getting my benefits reduced because I had wages during my first year on unemployment.

To avoid any confusing or misunderstanding on your guys end, here is a link to the law that was passed and signed into law. It's Bill H.R. 4213........... Read The Bill: H.R. 4213 - GovTrack.us

That is the entire law right there. Please read that law carefully, specifically section 3 and 4. This should clear up any misunderstanding on your end or make you aware of the law if you haven't been already.

Now that you have seen the law in it's entirety, please restore my benefit amount to the higher amount of $300 a week.

EDD is violating federal law by reducing my benefit amount, please read the link to the federal law I sent you.



I wonder how EDD is going to respond to this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 07:34 PM
 
40 posts, read 114,105 times
Reputation: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariadne22 View Post
In your and any similar cases, I would definitely file an appeal. Print out and attach to this appeal HR4213 at this link and highlight the pertinent language and state HR4213 as the reason for the appeal:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...213enr.txt.pdf

I wonder if a class action suit against the State of California on behalf of all aggrieved unemployed people affected would be in order. Even a threat of same. Here is where newspapers and TV stations can be useful. Send/fax/email copies of this legislation to all of them and continue to do so several times a week until somebody pays attention. Follow up with phone calls.

Also, someone needs to contact an employment law attorney about this. If you don't trust California lawyers, perhaps an attorney from another state who is licensed to practice in California.

California is in violation of its fiduciary duty to the unemployed when it is incapable of or refuses to follow federal directives on federal money it is distributing.

Last, but not least. Have you contacted your governor or his wife about this blatant disregard for the rights of the unemployed? Maria Shriver is a Kennedy, after all. He just might pay attention, if she became aware of the issue.
I have contacted the governors office but all they did was have EDD call me and they kept giving me the same BS story. I also emailed my congresswoman Laura Richardson, but so far no reply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 08:08 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
14,431 posts, read 19,350,256 times
Reputation: 6921
Whoever answered you is incompetent to deal with the issue, obviously. I see on another thread a list of California officials whom you are contacting. They will most likely continue to ignore this until they are forced to do otherwise. For good reason.

Can you imagine the can of worms with their computer programming when they are forced to interpret and apply HR4213, and make whole all those who have reapplied and been forced to open new claim years at reduced benefit? Thought I read somewhere CA's computer system isn't too great. They just got through dealing with all the retro stuff - or maybe they haven't yet. Now they have yet another mess.

Also, contact Maria Shriver and link the legislation. I'm serious.

California is in deliberate violation of federal rules on the distribution of federal money. They are treading dangerous waters as I still believe there are grounds here for a class action lawsuit.

Last edited by Ariadne22; 09-16-2010 at 08:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 09:03 PM
 
140 posts, read 361,387 times
Reputation: 72
Clueless. Yep. They are completely clueless. It's par for the course with them. I honestly believe they get some sort of pay off (such as interest payments) and a certain immunity from being sued, that's why they continue this baloney.

Antrob, I for one appreciate you coming back and keeping us informed. I will do the same with my case. I am going to contact Maria Shriver as Ariadne22 suggested. It certainly can't hurt. *exasperated sigh*
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2010, 02:45 PM
 
118 posts, read 293,478 times
Reputation: 98
It may also be worth noting in your communication with any officials that the correct name of H.R. 4213 now that it was been signed into law is P.L. 111-205. P.L. stands for Public Law. It's probably best to refer to it by both names to be absolutely clear.

I appreciate that you guys are doing this. My benefit year doesn't end until January, but I would have faced this same problem then if not for people like you guys who had to deal with it sooner. Of course, knowing EDD, I may still have to deal with it anyway.

I suspect that it's definitely the case as Ariadne said, that EDD's computer system is a mess and so they have a larger burden when it comes to implementing this law than some other states. I'm curious if any states are in compliance yet. If so, that would be a good point tobring up with EDD as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2010, 03:21 PM
 
140 posts, read 361,387 times
Reputation: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweater Fish View Post

I suspect that it's definitely the case as Ariadne said, that EDD's computer system is a mess and so they have a larger burden when it comes to implementing this law than some other states. I'm curious if any states are in compliance yet. If so, that would be a good point tobring up with EDD as well.

Interesting because their website says "they're working on it" since May 2010. Wondering what the holdup is. Also a good idea to research other states' compliance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2010, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
14,431 posts, read 19,350,256 times
Reputation: 6921
One further thought, if you all have not done so yet.

Contact the Attorney General for the State of California by email, phone and letter, and inform him that the State of California is in noncompliance with federal guidelines in the distribution of federal unemployment funds.

The lawyers in that department should at least understand the significance and ramifications of that noncompliance. Might want to mention possible exposure to a class-action lawsuit if not rectified, not to mention possible federal penalities. There must be some on the books somewhere.

I write letters to officials all the time. It is amazing the results I get.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2010, 05:41 PM
 
613 posts, read 600,098 times
Reputation: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by antrob View Post
Another Update regarding my situation. I received another E mail from EDD today that is once again denying that my benefit amount should of not been reduced.

Here was my first response: And here was their response
[SIZE=3]I sent you a question last week my reference number is 3534780. You guys replied back saying the issue was resolved over the phone. This issue was not resolved over the phone and I'm still waiting for a satisfactory outcome. EDD is in violation of federal law by reducing my benefit amount and I'm asking that it be restored to the higher amount immediately. If there are no procedure's in place to change it, someone needs to do it manually. By keeping my benefit amount at the reduced amount, EDD is knowing violating federal law. Please follow the federal law and restore my benefit amount to $300 a week. Thank You.
[/SIZE]
And here was their response:
[SIZE=3]
We did not violated the federal law. You were on the extension and the claim expired, you need it to file a new claim. If you are eligible for the new claim regardless of the weekly benefit amount you have to continue with the new claim, this is a requirement of the Federal law. We are not going to put you back on the extension, you will be on the new claim... You weekly benefit amount is base on the highest quarter, since you did work that much that's why your benefit is low. [/SIZE]

I start to wonder if EDD is just completely clueless. I just sent them this response:
I'm responding to the answer you gave me from my last question, my reference number is 3552143.

The person who responded to my answer is obviously not aware of the law the president Barack Obama signed into law on July 22, 2010. The law he signed had a provision in it that would protect me from getting my benefits reduced because I had wages during my first year on unemployment.

To avoid any confusing or misunderstanding on your guys end, here is a link to the law that was passed and signed into law. It's Bill H.R. 4213........... Read The Bill: H.R. 4213 - GovTrack.us

That is the entire law right there. Please read that law carefully, specifically section 3 and 4. This should clear up any misunderstanding on your end or make you aware of the law if you haven't been already.

Now that you have seen the law in it's entirety, please restore my benefit amount to the higher amount of $300 a week.

EDD is violating federal law by reducing my benefit amount, please read the link to the federal law I sent you.



I wonder how EDD is going to respond to this.
Great response dude. They have no clue that part was added this past extension. If you have money for school, go to law school, you sound just like one. Now the next step, if they don't restore them, is to get the manager's name and number and call them. Your dealing with the entry level people who are trained to try and not give as much benefits as possible. Plus some states actually give their customer service people a quota of the number of calls they field a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 07:55 PM
 
40 posts, read 114,105 times
Reputation: 26
Another Update: So my situation has been resolved. EDD called me and informed me that they will manually put my benefit amount to the old amount and they cut me a check today for the amount they owed me.

For everyone in my situation call, write letters and complain. The lady I spoke to named Adriana, told me that they haven't fixed the computer system yet. They only manually changed my benefit amount back because I was making a fuss and someone from my legislators office got in contact with them. She actually congratulated me on this.

Good luck to all of you out there were all in the same boat. We have to keep making more noise if we want congress to keep funding EB after November.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top