Unemployment benefits denied-employer lied

S

sking

New Member
Jurisdiction
Maryland
I worked for a CPA firm for 6 months. I was let go from my job at the end of the tax season. 4/12/24. I originally started full time which required me to work until 7 pm and Saturdays during the busy tax season. After doing working until 7pm and several Saturdays, I asked if I could work part time instead. This was agreed to by the 3 partners in the firm and I was now paid on an hourly basis with hours of 8:30-3pm. 6 hours per day (1/2 hr lunch) Any additional time beyond this was up to me. My hours were tracked in a spreadsheet. These terms were summarized in an email sent to email by the senior partner.

This was 30 hours per week, and since most days I worked well past 3pm (usually 4:30 or 5pm) I had already worked 30 hours in the week of 4/12/24. Mon-Thurs. So on Friday 4/12 I said that I was taking the day off for personal reasons as I had some income tax work to do of my own. There were never any prior written warnings about absenteeism. I didn't think it would matter since I had already worked 30 hours during the week. Also I had worked more than 30 hours in several of the preceding weeks. Given that I was working part-time on an hourly basis I knew that I would not be paid for missing that day. It is not rational for him to fire me for not showing up on this day when I had already worked 30 hours for the week and he wasn't going to be paying me for not showing up on Friday. I assumed that there was flexibility with the part-time arrangement. There is no mention about requiring that I be present Monday-Friday.

The employer stated to the state of MD unemployment division that I had been given repeated warnings about absenteeism. This is a bald faced lie and the UI division accepted his statement and denied my benefits.

THE CLAIMANT WAS DISCHARGED OR SUSPENDED AS A DISCIPLINARY MEASURE BY
ANDERSON, DAVIS &amp; ASSOCIATES CPA PA ON <04/12/2024> BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVE
ABSENTEEISM. INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRESENTED SHOWING THE CLAIMANT
CONTINUED TO MISS TIME IN SPITE OF WARNINGS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS
AWARE THAT CONTINUED ABSENCES WOULD MEAN LOSS OF HIS/HER JOB. THE
CLAIMANT'S CONDUCT WAS A SERIES OF REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF EMPLOYMENT
RULES PROVING THAT THE CLAIMANT REGULARLY AND WANTONLY DISREGARDED
OBLIGATIONS TO THE EMPLOYER. UNDER SECTION 8-1002 OF THE MARYLAND
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE LAW, THIS CONSTITUTES GROSS MISCONDUCT IN
CONNECTION WITH THE WORK.
BENEFITS ARE DENIED WEEK BEGINNING 04/07/2024 AND UNTIL THE CLAIMANT
BECOMES REEMPLOYED AND EARNS AT LEAST (25X) TIMES HIS/HER WEEKLY BENEFIT
AMOUNT (WBA) $430.00. IF THE WBA CHANGES, THE EARNINGS REQUIREMENTS WILL
WILLFUL DISREGARD OF STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR THAT
AN EMPLOYING UNIT RIGHTFULLY EXPECTS AND THAT
SHOWS GROSS INDIFFERENCE TO THE INTERESTS OF THE
EMPLOYING UNIT; OR (II) REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT RULES THAT PROVE A REGULAR AND
WANTON DISREGARD OF THE employee's OBLIGATIONS. (B)
GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION. - AN INDIVIDUAL WHO
OTHERWISE IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE BENEFITS IS
DISQUALIFIED FROM RECEIVING BENEFITS IF
UNEMPLOYMENT RESULTS FROM DISCHARGE OR
SUSPENSION AS A DISCIPLINARY MEASURE FOR
BEHAVIOR THAT THE SECRETARY FINDS IS GROSS
MISCONDUCT IN CONNECTION WITH EMPLOYMENT. (C) A
DISQUALIFICATION UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL: (1)
BEGIN WITH THE FIRST WEEK FOR WHICH
UNEMPLOYMENT IS CAUSED BY DISCHARGE OR
SUSPENSION FOR GROSS MISCONDUCT AS DETERMINED
UNDER THIS SECTION; AND (2) CONTINUE UNTIL THE
INDIVIDUAL IS REEMPLOYED AND HAS EARNED WAGES IN
COVERED EMPLOYMENT THAT EQUAL AT LEAST 25 TIMES
THE WEEKLY BENEFIT AMOUNT OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

I got COVID working at this firm and I was gone for a week. Other people in the office also got COVID and were gone for a similar amount of time. I had also taken other sick days on days where I was not feeling well. I emailed my employer on the morning when I was not going to come in. I received a reply of "ok, I hope you feel better".

I used up all my sick days for the year but there was not any warning about excessive absenteeism given to me either verbally or in writing. Warnings about absenteeism are not given due to sickness and there was no warning to me about losing my job due to excessive sick time. I don't understand why MD would accept this statement from the employer without proof that he gave me a warning about losing my job. I have filed an appeal. Will MD require WRITTEN EVIDENCE from him showing where I was given warnings about excessive absenteeism?

This below:

"INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRESENTED SHOWING THE CLAIMANT
CONTINUED TO MISS TIME IN SPITE OF WARNINGS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS
AWARE THAT CONTINUED ABSENCES WOULD MEAN LOSS OF HIS/HER JOB."

is an absolute crock of nonsense. No warnings were ever given to me about absenteeism.
All employees are given a certain number of paid sick days when one is sick.
They cannot be used against me and classified as "excessive absences" and furthermore state the "warnings were given"
when that is not the case.

I took ONE and only ONE day off for personal reasons and all other missed time was valid paid sick time.
It seems improper for MD to deny benefits for someone in this instance. Sick time is a valid
reason for not coming to work and it should be be held against me in the determination of benefit approval.

Does anyone agree with me?
 
I know I have the right to appeal. I asked if attorneys here on this forum agree with me that unless there is written evidence to support his accusation, that MD should reverse their decision and approve my benefits.
 
I agree with the above, but I do want to point out that evidence doesn't have to be written to be valid. Did you submit written evidence to show that you weren't warned? Of course not. You gave a statement, which is also evidence.
 
The thing is, in any state, the UI Commission operates on the assumption that either or both parties may be lying. But I've seen too many decisions, in either direction, that I disagreed with in the UI system to make any guesses as to how an appeal with end. And that's what you're asking us to do - guess.
 
sking said:
The employer stated to the state of MD unemployment division that I had been given repeated warnings about absenteeism. This is a bald faced lie and the UI division accepted his statement and denied my benefits.
Click to expand...
This MIGHT clarify certain requirements for you.

Eligibility Requirements

1. What are the requirements to be eligible for unemployment insurance benefits?

After you file an initial claim for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits, the Maryland Division of Unemployment Insurance (Division) will determine whether you meet monetary and non-monetary eligibility requirements to be eligible for UI benefits.

  • To be monetarily eligible, you must have worked and earned sufficient wages during the standard base period or alternate base period The standard base period is the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters before the claim effective date.

    NOTE: Your claim effective date is the Sunday of the week in which you filed your initial claim. For example, if you file a claim on Wednesday, March 4, the claim's effective date is Sunday, March 1.

    To learn more, refer to question 7 "What is the Standard Base Period?" under the Claims Filing - Initial Claims section of this webpage.

    If you are not monetarily eligible based on the standard base period, the Division will determine if you are eligible based on the wages you earned in the alternate base period (i.e., the four most recently completed calendar quarters before the claim effective date. To learn more, refer to question 8 "What is the Alternate Base Period." under the Claims Filing - Initial Claims section of this webpage.
  • To be non-monetarily eligible, the Division will consider whether you are unemployed due to no fault of your own, whether you are able, available, and actively seeking work, and whether you received any payments that may be deducted from UI benefits (such as vacation pay, holiday pay, special pay, severance pay, retirement/pension payments, or back pay/damages).
For information about how to file an initial claim, including what information you may need, please see the Claims Filing - Initial Claims section of this webpage.

Claimant Most Frequently Asked Questions - Division of Unemployment Insurance

labor.maryland.gov labor.maryland.gov

3. Can I file a claim if I quit my job or if I am fired from my job?

Yes, you may apply for UI benefits (also called filing an initial claim) regardless of the reason you separated from your employment. However, filing a claim does not necessarily mean you will be eligible to receive UI benefits.

  • If you quit a job without good cause or valid circumstances attributable to your employment, UI benefits may be denied until you become reemployed and earn at least 15 times your weekly benefit amount in covered employment.
  • If you voluntarily quit a job with good cause or valid circumstances attributable to your employment and you meet all other eligibility requirements, you may be eligible for UI benefits. However, your UI benefits may be denied for five to 10 weeks before you receive UI benefits, depending on the circumstances. For more, see the Issues, Disqualifying Reasons, and Penalties webpage.
  • If you are discharged from employment due to no fault of your own, you may be eligible for UI benefits, if you meet all requirements.
  • If you are discharged due to simple or gross misconduct, you may be eligible for UI benefits. However, a penalty may be imposed. If aggravated misconduct applies, UI benefits may be denied. For more, see the Issues, Disqualifying Reasons, and Penalties webpage.
However, as each claimant's circumstances are different, your eligibility for UI benefits can not be determined until you file an initial claim. After you file your initial claim, a claims agent will determine if you are eligible.

Can I file a claim if I quit my job or if I am fired from my job?

Yes, you may apply for UI benefits (also called filing an initial claim) regardless of the reason you separated from your employment. However, filing a claim does not necessarily mean you will be eligible to receive UI benefits.

  • If you quit a job without good cause or valid circumstances attributable to your employment, UI benefits may be denied until you become reemployed and earn at least 15 times your weekly benefit amount in covered employment.
  • If you voluntarily quit a job with good cause or valid circumstances attributable to your employment and you meet all other eligibility requirements, you may be eligible for UI benefits. However, your UI benefits may be denied for five to 10 weeks before you receive UI benefits, depending on the circumstances. For more, see the Issues, Disqualifying Reasons, and Penalties webpage.
  • If you are discharged from employment due to no fault of your own, you may be eligible for UI benefits, if you meet all requirements.
  • If you are discharged due to simple or gross misconduct, you may be eligible for UI benefits. However, a penalty may be imposed. If aggravated misconduct applies, UI benefits may be denied. For more, see the Issues, Disqualifying Reasons, and Penalties webpage.
However, as each claimant's circumstances are different, your eligibility for UI benefits can not be determined until you file an initial claim. After you file your initial claim, a claims agent will determine if you are eligible.

4. Am I eligible to receive UI benefits if I am a full-time employee but only working part-time hours?

If your employer reduced your hours from full-time to part-time or if you lost your full-time job and are currently working part-time, you may file a claim to determine if you are eligible for UI benefits. As a full-time employee who is currently working part-time, you may be eligible for partial benefit payments if:

  • you are working all of the hours your employer offers to you; and,
  • you earn less than your weekly benefit amount, plus any dependents' allowance.
However, in this circumstance (full-time worker who is employed part-time), you must be able, available, and actively seeking full-time work to be eligible for UI benefits.

If you earn more than your weekly benefit amount, you will not be eligible for UI benefits.
 
Thank you for your responses here. I appreciate it very much.

When someone takes off time due to sickness, normally this is accepted by the employer as people get sick. The employer does not say "you're sick too much, and your job is in jeapordy"... This was never said to me in any format (written or verbal warning) My employer emailed me back on the morning I emailed him to say I was not feeling well saying "Ok, I hope you feel better". . When I got COVID and I was out for 5 days, he said, "Ok, I understand. See a doctor and get better". I have this email correspondence.

In the 6 months I worked there, I never once took a day off for "personal reasons". The UI division is muddling sick day absences and my one day of not showing up for personal reasons together and labeling them as "excessive absences", and stating that "the claimant continued to miss time in spite of warnings and that the claimant was aware that continued absences would mean loss of his/her job. " This is not the case at all and it is a false and ridiculous assertion. "Loss of His/Her job" is obviously some boilerplate terminology in my determination notice.

The only day I took off for personal reasons was the Friday right before the end of the tax season to work on my taxes. I didn't think this would matter as I had already worked the agreed upon 30 hours per week per the part-time schedule. Rather than simply terminate me for not showing up, he should have given me a warning about taking time off for personal reasons since I had never done this before. I would like to sue this employer for wrongful termination of my employment but I can't afford an attorney. I just want my benefits for doing my job very well which I did in getting him through the tax season. I processed over 200 tax returns, and if it weren't for my help, there would have been a whole lot of angry MD taxpayers put on extension for income taxes.

So at a hearing, unless he can provide written evidence that I was given fair warning about taking time off for personal reasons, should MD be siding with me and approving my benefits?
 
Last edited:
No. Maryland does not have to side with you and approve your benefits. They may. In fact, if you politely asked me for an opinion instead of demanding that we second-guess the Maryland UI Commission and provide you with a certainty, I would guess that it is likely you will succeed on appeal, based SOLELY on what you have provided.

However, my guess based on a one-sided, biased post is not binding on Maryland, which has access to facts not available to us. And if you are looking for someone to agree with you that Maryland is obligated to find in your favor, you're in the wrong place. Repeated demands are not going to get you a different answer.
 
sking said:
So at a hearing, unless he can provide written evidence that I was given fair warning about taking time off for personal reasons, should MD be siding with me and approving my benefits?
Click to expand...

The above question can ONLY be answered by one or more of the fine professionals employed by the State of Maryland.

I suggest you focus on the FACTS of your case and appeal.

Provide clear, concise answers to every query.

If information is required, comply with their requests.

Bottom line, mate, facts are all that matter.

Provide FACTS and PROOF, you just might prevail.

What you don't want to do is disparage your employer, or waste your time howling, "They're lying, they're making it up!"

Just provide facts and figures, prove your assertions, and you're likely to prevail upon appeal.

Don't argue, fuss, or fight.

Simply remain professional and polite!
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top