First of all, it's become clear, getting fired from a job is not the shameful thing it once was in days long gone when employees were treated with respect and gratitude for a job well done. And that should be a good thing, however, getting fired can become an emotional roller coaster, once some of you learn what your employer is now saying about the reason they fired you.
In fact, if the great recession should of taught any subordinate employee a thing, or two .. it's that being fired from a job quite often has nothing to do with us personally, or our qualities and skills as individual employees, but a business's bottom line ..
And the business end of things is more often than not, blind to the damage it's about to wreak on real people, when it becomes accustom to seeing them all as a potential financial liability to be dealt with.
Such is the case for fighting and at least attempting to deny all unemployment claims when the person is fired.
A word of advice .. when it comes to collecting unemployment benefits, the last thing you want to appear, or sound like .. is someone who may be thinking like you might of been a liability to the best interests of an employer.
Despite an employer's best efforts to make you appear guilty as hell for misconduct, employers fail more often at unemployment appeal hearings with this issue when they strayed away from their own rules and policies within an employee handbook to fire you for something that requires a stretch of the imagination to apply to your cause for discharge.
That they lose more often is logical, as just opting to terminate an at-will employee mean it is now the employer, not you, who must meet unemployment law's burden of proof and further, be able to sustain if was for work related misconduct.
There is a problem with how employees approach the very idea of being able to collect unemployment when they lose their job for any reason not their fault .. and that's often the cause of them being denied benefits.
At least if the Q&As about Getting Fired are any indication.
In the case of unemployment and getting fired, the employer must say it was work misconduct if they hope to meet their initial burden, or be required to sustain it at an unemployment hearing.
BUT, it is not you, the employee, that is required to prove you're not guilty as much as you do need to think about how you will rebut the employer's capacity to prove you were guilty of whatever a state may define as being work misconduct .. just for purposes of determining your right to UI benefits.
In other words .. nobody who works on unemployment claims has time to give a hoot if you were a stellar employee with excellent performance reviews for twenty years because that info will seldom be relevant to disproving you intentionally violated.
Let's say you were terminated for violation of the attendance policy. Employer says it was never for a good reason and all occurrences happened over the last three months.
What you can .. must do in fact, is rebut with evidence, or at least some credible sounding explanation as to why your attendance behavior wasn't work misconduct and effectively shifts the burden back to the employer to answer a new question, from a different perspective.
Let's say you got fired for what you know were absences due to an illness. Misconduct is now being related to your health and that's why you ended up getting fired. You know as well your boss ignored the Dr. notes you were required to bring her, and she also told you she couldn't spare you when you requested a leave of absence, or your right to exercise the job protection of even an intermittent family medical leave (FMLA) provided by a different law.
My first question to you would probably be to ask if you did anything that will make your job of rebutting easier .. such as documenting conversations in emails to your boss to clarify your understanding of her position?
Believe me .. by the time you read some Q&As about getting fired .. you'll see I drift the same way .. most of the time.