Who handles your unemployment hearings?
Redbudpt
55 Posts
Hello, I was wondering how each of you handle unemployment hearings? How large is your company and what is your success rate with denying benefits? Does your HR department handle them alone? If so how do you handle the hearing when specific questions are asked about events that were documented but HR was not a witness to these things? I know that you may have witnesses present to testify but we recently had an experience where the judge questioned events that were mentioned by the employee but were not relavent to the termination and expected HR to respond. Any information is appreciated. Thank you.
Comments
HR Handles.
We bring in witnesses. It's important that you have an understanding of the administration's requirements to deny benefits so that you know what facts are required for your investigation. I find often when I come to a company that their own policies create terminations that virtually guarantee UI benefits. Make sure that your terminations are structured around misconduct associated with the work if UI expenses are a concern for you or if people come to work for you specifically to get UI benefits.
When the hearing officer asks a question, sometimes it is hard to be sure that the question has nothing to do with a determination regarding the cause of termination. They can be pretty tricky about granting benefits and the initial hearing officer has very wide lattitude. If, after consideration, you determine that the question was improper or unrelated AND it played a role in the granting of benefits, appeal the decision and put that issue in your request for appeal letter.
You can also simply object to the question. Administrative hearings are highly informal, and the hearing officer has a lot of authority to decide whether he or she wants to hear the answer. However, you can say something like, "I don't have that information at my fingertips because I didn't see its relevance. Is that information relevant to whether <employee's name>'s separation constituted misconduct associated with the work?"
Good morning.
You are asking several questions. I am a consultant/contractor who works with companies on UIC matters, among other things. I attend 7 or so hearings per week both on the phone and in person. The success rate depends on how well the people manage the situation prior to the separation, prepare for the hearing and the mood of the Judge.
Your point about HR not being a witness is a good one. Generally, HR need not attend. The judges want to hear from those with first hand information. Most hearing notices spell out the topic/s, (basis) for the hearing which will assist in prepration. The Judge or referee - or hearing officer, depending on your state, may believe a topic is relevant. If you are not prepared to answer, tell the Judge and request either an adjournment, or a recess to obtain the info.
If you care to send me your fax number I can send you a prep sheet I provide to my clients and students. Good luck.
Bill ONeil SPHR
Williamsville, N.Y.
Generally, HR need not attend. The judges want to hear from those with first hand information.
[/quote]
There's an awkward tension in the quote above. "HR generally need not attend where HR is generally not involved in terminations" would be more accurate. Environments in which HR is generally transactional and less involved in EE relations and the termination process are more likely to need consultants to handle UI claims, hence the perception that "Generally, HR need not attend."
One of the first things I do when I come to a new environment is erode individual supervisor termination power to ensure HR's involvement. The resulting trend in reduced need for consultants and lawyers due to the reduction in agency and would-be-plaintiff inquiries has been consistent across industries, states, and decades.