Illinois - should I have reported PTO? (receive, payment, holiday)

[moomoocow123]

Last month I was laid off in Illinois. My last day was 10/11 and I filed for unemployment on 10/13. I have already done my first certification(10/29) and received my first payment (10/30).

During the timeframe of the first certification I received my final paycheck which included my final week of work (leading up to 10/11) and a payout for all of my unused PTO. The deposit with this money was received by me on 10/24. I was under the impression that since I "earned" this money before 10/11 I wouldn't need to report it in my certification, but now I'm not so sure - especially regarding the PTO. I'm happy to call and fix this if I made a mistake. Should I have reported this money? Again this is in Illinois.

[Chyvan]

Originally Posted by moomoocow123

Should I have reported this money?

I don't know, BUT your employer is sent a questionnaire. The employer has the opportunity to report the PTO since you did not. Do NOT call the UI people to try to fix this. It will fix itself IF it even counts against you. Some states don't count trailing PTO because when you don't have a job to go to anymore it's NOT a vacation. Other states do count it against, but IL will figure it out by reviewing what your employer reported, and will make the appropriate adjustments without you wasting your time.

[moomoocow123]

Hi Chyvan, thank you so much for your response!

I do have one concern though. Would there be any risk of an accusation of fraud if I don't approach IL first to correct the mistake (assuming I should have reported this income)? I definitely am not trying to defraud the system, and if it turns out I need to pay my first payment back I'd rather get that done sooner rather than later. I'm worried if IL approaches me first it'll look fraudulent on my end even though it was a genuine mistake/misunderstanding. The certification questions don't actually ask about PTO payouts (it does ask about "holiday pay" but that seems different based on my research) hence my original assumption this didn't need to be reported.

[Chyvan]

Originally Posted by moomoocow123

Would there be any risk of an accusation of fraud if I don't approach IL first to correct the mistake (assuming I should have reported this income)?

Possibly, but it's easier to deal with it after the fact. There's special phone numbers for stuff like this that will be in an overpayment letter, and those people answer the phone.

Trying to fix this through the regular lines can take HOURS. It's not worth your time. If you get called on the carpet, you'll be able to call, have someone answer right away. You can tell your version that because it was "accrued" PTO that it represented money from BEFORE you even applied and doesn't count against you. They'll maybe say, "that's not how it works in IL but because you saw it differently, there was no fraud here." Fraud requires intent to get something for nothing. You did nothing wrong.

Originally Posted by moomoocow123

I'd rather get that done sooner rather than later.

That's noble of you, but the system can't handle that. It's reactionary, not proactive. It's just so much less work, and you'll get a better result with less of your precious time being wasted to let it play out.

Originally Posted by moomoocow123

I'm worried if IL approaches me first it'll look fraudulent on my end even though it was a genuine mistake/misunderstanding.

It wasn't a mistake or a misunderstanding, it's sound logic on your part. It would be one thing if you were working on the side, but this is your first UI check, and there is a question as to just when that PTO was considered "earned": was it prior to your application date for UI or when paid?

Originally Posted by moomoocow123

The certification questions don't actually ask about PTO payouts (it does ask about "holiday pay" but that seems different based on my research) hence my original assumption this didn't need to be reported.

This is more from when someone has a part-time job and they get paid for a holiday that they didn't work and wouldn't normally get reported from the standard wording of the questions.