Posted by marykeating on February 6, 2010 under Pending legislation, Unemployment compensation | 
We get occasional glimpses of hope in the economic news, but the unemployment rate remains high. The latest projection I heard projected unemployment remaining above ten percent all year. To deal with the prolonged unemployment of so many workers, the government has extended the maximum weeks of unemployment benefits. It also has increased the unemployment tax payable by employers.
This sets the stage for the classic clash of interests in Annapolis. Some business interests are asking for a reduction of benefits, while others are urging higher weekly benefits and more weeks. An emergency bill is pending this session, and has made it past the first stage. According to the bill, some of the changes to the law are necessary to qualify for the federal stimulus funds.
One of the more employee friendly provisions changes the formula for calculating the weekly unemployment benefit, by looking at the most recent four quarters of pay rates. This provision would help workers who had been earning increased amounts in their fields before becoming unemployed.
In addition, the law provides for extended benefits and training for unemployed workers who have been unemployed for an extended period, and are in a declining occupation, or were laid off in a permanent reduction in force. Employers’s rating experience is not charged for unemployed individuals receiving the additional training benefits.
Posted by marykeating on January 1, 2010 under Unemployment compensation |
The Court of Special Appeals recently granted unemployment benefits to a woman whose claim had been rejected by a hearing examiner, the Board of Appeals, and the Circuit Court. Pursuing this many appeals is not easy, nor inexpensive, but the effort will help others, not just the unemployed claimant in this case.
Michelle Parham worked for several months for Mid-Atlantic Baking Company. She called in sick one day early in her tenure, then again for two consecutive days. Upon her return, her supervisor gave her a write-up, with the box marked “termination” checked. Another company document states that Ms. Parham walked out without clocking out, and thus was labeled a voluntary quit.
It is difficult but not impossible to obtain unemployment benefits if one quits a job; the reason for quitting is crucial. In this case, though, Ms. Parham contended that she was fired, and the company claims that she was told to speak with a higher up supervisor, but instead, left the plant without ever contacting the company again. The dispute centered completely on what was said at the final meeting between the employee and the manager on duty.
The manager on duty did not attend the hearing. Instead, two employees who were not at the plant on Ms. Parham’s last date testified that she had been instructed to call the department supervisor, but instead walked out. Their testimony was not based on personal knowledge, nor was it apparently based on discussions with the manager on duty. Hearsay testimony, in which one person reports on what someone else says and offers it for the truth of the report, is allowed in unemployment hearings. On the other hand, the hearsay testimony must give some indication that it’s reliable. Mid-Atlantic failed to convince the court that its hearsay testimony, which contradicted both Ms. Parman’s testimony and the document indicating her termination, was not reliable enough to uphold the denial of benefits.
In litigation, companies often produce after-the-fact explanations of an employee’s departure. This comes up frequently in discrimination cases, in which the reason for a termination is discriminatory bias or some legal explanation focusing on the employee’s faults. To buttress its case, Mid-Atlantic should have brought the manager on duty as its witness, since she had personal knowledge of the discussion. By leaving her out of the loop, Mid-Atlantic produced insufficiently strong evidence to support its version of the facts.
Posted by marykeating on December 5, 2009 under Unemployment compensation |
Receiving unemployment benefits is a mixed benefit: it’s better to have a job, both financially and for the sense of security and accomplishment it gives a worker. Unemployment benefits are a reasonably good safety net, though, when the job search effort is not working out. It might keep the roof over the heads, the mac and cheese in the bellies.
Congress and Maryland have been gradually increasing the number of weeks of benefits allowed, in the context of the lingering recession and the unemployment rate at 10%, according to the latest statistics, but topping that in many places.
This morning’s New York Times reported that we may not see the pattern in former recessions, where unemployment continued to rise even as the economy climbed back.
Still, it could be awhile before the unemployment rate drifts back down to 4 or 5%. Maryland now has increased the maximum weekly benefit, which is now $410. This rate applies to employees who formerly earned from $9,816 per calendar quarter and up. For many people that is a major comedown from their former salaries, but this benefit is necessary for many people to survive. The schedule of benefits can be found here.
