Texas Unemployment advice for employers...? (employee, unemployment benefits, employer, job)

[fierce_flawless]

Maybe I'm way off base here, but in doing a search for info on "good cause to quit", I came across the following, from a state of Texas official gov't website:

Unemployment Insurance Law: The Claim and Appeal Process

I realize it's a long and boring read, but if you look over it you will see that while some of it is just the facts (i.e what happens if there is an appeal, what to expect, etc) some other parts of it are very obviously "how to avoid having to pay out UI, how to word things, how to strengthen your case" and this doesn't seem appropriate, to me, from a government agency.

So I am wondering what the state of Texas is doing in basically advising employers on how to 'win' their case.

Shouldn't the TWC be an impartial entity who simply hears the facts and makes a decision? Shouldn't they be only providing facts on their website, vs. what appears to be ADVICE? If they are going to offer this huge section that is basically on "how to win" a UI claim as an employer, shouldn't they have a similar section on how to win if you are an employee?

Thoughts?

[mikeyyc]

It's criteria, not advice. and it cuts both ways. If you know what they need to mount a defense, then you know what you should do to win.

[fierce_flawless]

Originally Posted by mikeyyc

It's criteria, not advice. and it cuts both ways. If you know what they need to mount a defense, then you know what you should do to win.

Well, here's an example from the site.. and while I realize that an employee can USE this information, that's not the point. I'm wondernig why it's being specifically addressed to employers. Anyone else think this is simply criteria?

Have any witnesses ready to go. Nothing is worse than to claim you have somebody who can support your version of the facts, only to have to confess that you do not have that person ready to testify or do not know where the witness is. The very worst thing is to have to admit that you did not know that witnesses were necessary. OF COURSE WITNESSES ARE NECESSARY!! This is the United States; under our system of justice, an accused has the right to face his accusers. If you allege that the claimant was fired for some type of misconduct, but have no eyewitnesses, and the claimant is giving what sounds like a credible denial, YOU WILL LOSE THE CASE. It is as simple as that. To have a good chance of winning a case, you need what are known as "firsthand" witnesses. Firsthand witnesses have direct, personal knowledge of what the claimant did to bring about his discharge or of what happened to cause the claimant to quit.


EXAMPLE OF LOSING TESTIMONY: "We fired the claimant after his supervisor told us he saw the claimant removing company property without permission." The claimant then wins by stating "No, I didn't."


EXAMPLE OF WINNING TESTIMONY: "I was the claimant's supervisor. I saw him removing boxes of company property, and he did it without my permission." At this point, the claimant either knows he is going to lose, or else tries a last-ditch excuse by stating that he had permission from someone else, whereupon the well-prepared employer immediately offers to let the hearing officer take testimony from that person as well.

The problem with written statements and affidavits is that they cannot be cross-examined; sworn testimony subject to cross-examination carries by far the greatest weight in a case. If the eyewitness is a former employee, call him or her and ask for their testimony. If they refuse to cooperate, contact the hearing officer and ask that the person be subpoenaed. If they cannot be located in time for the hearing, then and only then will you have a decent argument that a rehearing should be granted if and when you locate them.

During the hearing, remain calm. It might help to make an outline of your testimony to assist you in hitting all the important points. However, do not read from a prepared statement. It will sound obviously scripted and artificial and might create an unfavorable impression in the mind of the hearing officer.

In addition, hearing officers appreciate brevity. Employers who sound well-organized and in command of their facts always appear more credible. In a close case, that might well tip the balance in your favor.

[sapphire]

From your original post, it sounds like you are looking for a reason to quit your job, yet get paid unemployment.....if so, I would side with an employer! If you're unhappy at your job, can't you go up the chain to try and get things resolved, and if not, find something else!

The reason I say it sounds like you are looking for a reason to quit is because your very own google search contains that phrase. Do you have a human resources dept. or an anonymous tip line, or some way you can try to make your work situation better? Documentation, documentation, documentation!! People are more apt to listen to you if you are factual rather than emotional.

Unemployment is a great tool for getting you through to the next job, but it's nowhere near what you can make actually working.

Good luck--it sucks being miserable at work.

[fierce_flawless]

Originally Posted by sapphire

From your original post, it sounds like you are looking for a reason to quit your job, yet get paid unemployment.....if so, I would side with an employer! If you're unhappy at your job, can't you go up the chain to try and get things resolved, and if not, find something else!

The reason I say it sounds like you are looking for a reason to quit is because your very own google search contains that phrase. Do you have a human resources dept. or an anonymous tip line, or some way you can try to make your work situation better? Documentation, documentation, documentation!! People are more apt to listen to you if you are factual rather than emotional.

Unemployment is a great tool for getting you through to the next job, but it's nowhere near what you can make actually working.

Good luck--it sucks being miserable at work.

Sorry Sapphire, not the case.

I was curious about the "good cause" consideration because I was reading a post here on CD about a person who was having to deal with safety hazards at their job, and I was wondering if TWC considered that "good cause to quit". Other posters had advised the individual that quitting would automatically disqualify them from getting UI, I was wondering if that was true in cases where your health or safety (or both) is jeapordized.



And so, when I was researching this and started reading the info I found, I had to double check twice... I was pretty surprised that this info, which to me looked like advice strongly aimed at employers, came directly from a government website.

I just wondered if that would be within the scope and purpose of a state's unemployment commission. I was under the impression that the primary purpose was to help match up employers with employees (and vice versa), and make fair decisions in UI claims. Not tell employers how to best win their case (they have lawyers for that?)..

So I am wondering if I have the wrong impression about what OUR Unemployment Commission is supposed to be doing for US, all of us as taxpayers, employers and employees alike. What is their defined role and shouldn't they be impartial?

[sapphire]

From their website:
The Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) is the state government agency charged with overseeing and providing workforce development services to employers and job seekers of Texas. For employers, TWC offers recruiting, retention, training and retraining, and outplacement services as well as valuable information on labor law and labor market statistics. For job seekers, TWC offers career development information, job search resources, training programs, and, as appropriate, unemployment benefits. While targeted populations receive intensive assistance to overcome barriers to employment all Texans can benefit from the services offered by TWC and our network of workforce partners.

I wasn't being accusatory--I haven't read your other posts to determine why you would ask such a question. Sorry if it came off that way.

[fierce_flawless]

Originally Posted by sapphire

From their website:
The Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) is the state government agency charged with overseeing and providing workforce development services to employers and job seekers of Texas. For employers, TWC offers recruiting, retention, training and retraining, and outplacement services as well as valuable information on labor law and labor market statistics. For job seekers, TWC offers career development information, job search resources, training programs, and, as appropriate, unemployment benefits. While targeted populations receive intensive assistance to overcome barriers to employment all Texans can benefit from the services offered by TWC and our network of workforce partners.

I wasn't being accusatory--I haven't read your other posts to determine why you would ask such a question. Sorry if it came off that way.

Nah, it's good, and it didn't.

I just wondered about this and wondered if anyone else had any thoughts on it, or agreed with me about TWC's "advice giving".

If there was also a section detailing "how to best fight for your UI claim when you've been separated from your job" then I wouldn't have felt it was biased or inappropriate.

[TruthandJustice]

Originally Posted by fierce_flawless

Maybe I'm way off base here, but in doing a search for info on "good cause to quit", I came across the following, from a state of Texas official gov't website:

Unemployment Insurance Law: The Claim and Appeal Process

I realize it's a long and boring read, but if you look over it you will see that while some of it is just the facts (i.e what happens if there is an appeal, what to expect, etc) some other parts of it are very obviously "how to avoid having to pay out UI, how to word things, how to strengthen your case" and this doesn't seem appropriate, to me, from a government agency.

So I am wondering what the state of Texas is doing in basically advising employers on how to 'win' their case.

Shouldn't the TWC be an impartial entity who simply hears the facts and makes a decision? Shouldn't they be only providing facts on their website, vs. what appears to be ADVICE? If they are going to offer this huge section that is basically on "how to win" a UI claim as an employer, shouldn't they have a similar section on how to win if you are an employee?

Thoughts?

Does anyone see a detailed comprehensive list of what "good cause to quit" actually is?

This from TWC:
...TWC has long defined "good cause" as any reason, connected with the work, that would lead an employee who is otherwise interested in remaining employed to nonetheless leave employment. This, of course, is a "reasonable employee" standard. Good cause to quit has been found in cases involving drastic cuts in pay or hours, other substantial and adverse changes in the work, prolonged and unaddressed harassment of the worker by the employer or its agents, or egregious acts of misconduct by the employer toward the worker. In most cases, the claimant must also show that he gave the employer reasonable notice that he was so dissatisfied he was considering resignation.
http://www.twc.state.tx.us/news/efte...l_process.html

This from TYLA:
Q: What is “good cause” for voluntarily quitting?
Some reasons that can be “good cause” for quitting include: not getting paid wages or overtime, harassment by supervisors or co-workers, major changes in your job that make your job worse, unsafe working conditions and unfair discipline. Before you quit, you must tell your employer about the problem (preferably in writing or with a witness present) and give the employer a chance to fix it. Also, if you can prove that you quit to avoid being fired, your employer will have to prove that you committed “work-related misconduct.”
http://www.tyla.org/pdfs/LawOfTheLand.pdf

TruthandJustice

[Unemployed and Curious]

I recently quit my job due to repeated demands from my employer to work outside my job that I was hired to do. After repeated attempts to correct the situation with both HR and Management. Now I have been denied UI on the grounds that I quit my job. I was told by the UI case worker that the employer stated their reason I quit was to accept employment elsewhere. How can I fight this?

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by Unemployed and Curious

I recently quit my job due to repeated demands from my employer to work outside my job that I was hired to do. After repeated attempts to correct the situation with both HR and Management. Now I have been denied UI on the grounds that I quit my job. I was told by the UI case worker that the employer stated their reason I quit was to accept employment elsewhere. How can I fight this?

If you live in a right to work state I don't think you have a case unless you can prove your company lied. Just because you were hired to do B doesn't mean they can't have you do C.