Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Further evidence of pay - your W-2 from 2015 which you used to file your tax return. Employer is required to provide that by end of January 2016. You must have that somewhere. Can't believe you never got a hard paystub - I always did even with direct deposit but that was way back in 2009. In future, always print your paystubs and keep hard copies.
Further evidence of pay - your W-2 from 2015 which you used to file your tax return. Employer is required to provide that by end of January 2016. You must have that somewhere. Can't believe you never got a hard paystub - I always did even with direct deposit but that was way back in 2009. In future, always print your paystubs and keep hard copies.
The W-2 I definitely have. Good point on keeping hard copies of paystubs. I'll definitely do that going forward. Hindsight is 20/20, but I never imagined needing them for anything.
I have screenshots of some abusive/disrespectful chat messages,
UI is about the reason you stopped working when you did. If these emails happened on the same day as the "last paycheck," then maybe, but if not, forget them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
I've read some other threads mentioning objections based on hearsay
I'm not seeing hearsay in your case, but if there is, you usually only get to object to it once while it's happening. The judge in 95% of the cases will say, "hearsay is allowed." Then you'll get the occasional "for what it's worth," or "will be given it's proper weight." It's so that the judge knows that you know what hearsay is, and protects your rights on appeal if you find the entire decision revolved around it.
Think of when an employer says that they got a customer complaint. What if the customer was just making it up to get comp'd a meal. You just know that the customer won't be at your hearing.
The point is that it might be a good reason to fire someone, but it's just not right to deny the person UI when they can't face their accuser. However, most claimants would be more than willing to say, "yes, I treated the customer badly. They did it to me first." That's why we tell people to keep their mouth shut in discharges.
UI is about the reason you stopped working when you did. If these emails happened on the same day as the "last paycheck," then maybe, but if not, forget them.
I'm not seeing hearsay in your case, but if there is, you usually only get to object to it once while it's happening. The judge in 95% of the cases will say, "hearsay is allowed." Then you'll get the occasional "for what it's worth," or "will be given it's proper weight." It's so that the judge knows that you know what hearsay is, and protects your rights on appeal if you find the entire decision revolved around it.
Think of when an employer says that they got a customer complaint. What if the customer was just making it up to get comp'd a meal. You just know that the customer won't be at your hearing.
The point is that it might be a good reason to fire someone, but it's just not right to deny the person UI when they can't face their accuser. However, most claimants would be more than willing to say, "yes, I treated the customer badly. They did it to me first." That's why we tell people to keep their mouth shut in discharges.
Got it. So, present my evidence - W-2, direct deposits, and email notice - and then keep my mouth shut more or less? Should I have a statement prepared, or questions for my employer? This has put me in an incredibly difficult spot financially, and I don't want to make any mistakes that may cost me a win here. I've read that appeals are won by the claimant ~55% of the time - is that a good representation of my odds?
I vote no on this one unless W-2s break out commissions, and it's been 5 years since I got one, and I was never on commission, so I'm going with "I don't think they do."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
keep my mouth shut more or less?
You may not be able to. I think this might really be a quit, a good cause quit just the same, but you might have to talk more than we'd like. As a quitter the burden is on you, so you've got to tell your story very well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
Should I have a statement prepared,
NO! Your testimony is your statement. People that read things just look unspontaneous and like liars. You need to be quick on your feet and just know that NOT being paid or being told that you wouldn't be paid is good cause.
Because the minimum wage issue and the draw thing is uncertain, you really need to throw in there that you did something no matter how tiny to try to keep your job. The discussion that the employer wanted you to use credit to finance your life, is probably a nice touch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
or questions for my employer?
The judge will ask most of the good ones, but if think you've got one that they didn't think of that's not repetious, then go for it.
I'm betting that your employer won't come. It's one thing to take a call from an EDD work and slam you, and another to actually go there. That takes time, and people are inherently lazy, and he's got a business to run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
This has put me in an incredibly difficult spot financially, and I don't want to make any mistakes that may cost me a win here. I've read that appeals are won by the claimant ~55% of the time - is that a good representation of my odds?
Yes, but I think your odds are much higher. Your EDD decision completely ignores that you'd have been working for free. It's just what EDD workers do to people on here because we're represented by the problem children.
You may not be able to. I think this might really be a quit, a good cause quit just the same, but you might have to talk more than we'd like. As a quitter the burden is on you, so you've got to tell your story very well.
It's not going to automatically disqualify me that I put "lay-off" as the reason for separation initially? Do I address that immediately along the lines of, "that was my honest interpretation of the email and I didn't mean to be misleading?"
On a side note, the ruling that I quit because I was afraid of being fired really throws me for a loop. What's the difference there according to the EDD? Logically the net result is the same, but there has to be some reason for them to make that distinction.
Got it. So, present my evidence - W-2, direct deposits, and email notice - and then keep my mouth shut more or less? Should I have a statement prepared, or questions for my employer? This has put me in an incredibly difficult spot financially, and I don't want to make any mistakes that may cost me a win here. I've read that appeals are won by the claimant ~55% of the time - is that a good representation of my odds?
You've had regular direct deposits twice a month. When were commissions paid? Do commissions appear as a separate direct deposit? At the very least, your W-2 should reflect a total of both. I would absolutely present the W-2 if you can substantiate the total of both draw and commission for 2015.
CA is going to believe you if you are half-way credible. They know an employer scam when they see one.
It's not going to automatically disqualify me that I put "lay-off" as the reason for separation initially? Do I address that immediately along the lines of, "that was my honest interpretation of the email and I didn't mean to be misleading?"
I would handle the "false statement" by just pointing out that the email was to multiple people and since you weren't on a draw, you concluded that the company was out of money and couldn't meet payroll, and that looks like a lay off to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbageman2244
On a side note, the ruling that I quit because I was afraid of being fired really throws me for a loop. What's the difference there according to the EDD? Logically the net result is the same, but there has to be some reason for them to make that distinction.
It was the email. It didn't say that you were fired, and it didn't make the distinction that you might not really be on a draw. Therefore, you quit because you thought that the axe would fall. I know it's pathetic, but it's what a lazy adjudicator does. They have a list, and quitting in anticipation of discharge comes before quitting because you're not getting paid.
You've had regular direct deposits twice a month. When were commissions paid? Do commissions appear as a separate direct deposit? At the very least, your W-2 should reflect a total of both. I would absolutely present the W-2 if you can substantiate the total of both draw and commission for 2015.
CA is going to believe you if you are half-way credible. They know an employer scam when they see one.
Yes, they're separate direct deposits, one paid on the same day as the regular deposit, another paid on a different day. My W-2 has everything listed under "wages, tips, other comp." The totals add up, but there's no distinction for commission vs salary/draw.
It's one extra piece of paper, so take it with you. My point was that commission + draw was more important than proving that you got paid so I wouldn't lead with it because you might confuse the ALJ that you're making a 1099 vs W-2 issue. Try to make it really easy for the ALJ to follow what you're trying to prove because they will be initially tainted by the quit in anticipation of being fired.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
