Here's something about me ..Chris - Unemployment-Tips.com
I know what's written in the stone of a first level unemployment decision is often not the whole truth. But is often the story deemed to be most credible because it was weighted with documentation (proof) and there wasn't any docs from you, to prove the contrary on the subject of who you thought was really at fault for your job separation..
I know because I was the unemployment hearing coordinator, or consultant if you prefer on thousands hearing notices that crossed my desk while employed by a business called an unemployment claims management company.
One of my job duties was going all out to gather evidence to bolster the direct witnesses, I sometimes had to hunt down for first hand testimony against you, the former employee who filed the claim.
Then I tidied up the pile .. I mean file, sometimes meaning there was a necessity to take out the damning evidence that could harm the best interest of the client employer and send it all to the independent non-attorney hearing rep I had contracted to appear with the employer's direct witnesses at the hearing .. unless of course, one of five states forced me to then hunt down an actual unemployment attorney willing to work for peanuts.
So, I found it curious, but not quite surprising, that when I decided to aid and abet claimants, in much the same way, five states jumped to twelve and left me without much recourse to offer referrals to an unemployment professional's services .. except to offer one on one coaching to represent themselves better .. because attorneys have rules of ethics to abide by .. because I insist on a finder's fee for my efforts to not send lousy cases onto professionals.
The promise of the service company I worked for was that it could reduce and control an employer's UI tax experience rating, by handling you .. and that this often only happens at a first level hearing isn't a surprise to most employers used to the drill. But it is a suprise when a claimant shows up represented .. well that is .. because it's out of the norm for penniless unemployed people.
So, imagine me at my job, just one cog in a big wheel house making an educated/trained effort to make sure an employer's argument at the first level appeal hearing was prepared as best it could be, for the desired end result of maintaining a low as possible UI tax rate..
And imagine that I knew whether an employer's appeal had merit, or I could see your's did, that I began to see all appeals as being good, bad, or just indifferent. But I also knew that regardless of how I felt, approximately 35 percent end up ground out of the system of collecting benefits, when I could see they had a good chance to prove, or show their employer to be the one at fault .. if only.
Claiming you didn't know how, or don't what to argue, prove, rebut, object to, or do to protect any other right to due process before, or during the creation of the record at the first hearing, makes an employee, just as susceptible to the findings of similar state precedent UI decisions as this one in Michigan, which explains, why what you don't know .. is no excuse for not winning.
In case you don't click links to read, the last line says ...
"It is the duty and responsibility of a party, not the court, to search for and uncover legal authority in support of the party's argument."
Maybe the husband/employer should of checked the "coverage" chartbook .. for an idea to argue against his ex-wife's benefits.
Other than what I know about denying unemployment benefits ..
This website is my story. And it's about making myself free enough, to adhere to my own terms, conditions, and expectations for living and working to attain a better chance at leaving here, soulfully instead of woefully, intact.