I was recently laid off in April of 2009. I filed for unemployment benefits. I was originally denied benefits because the unemployment commission spoke with the company owner and they did not have an appropriate phone number for me (my fault) so I wasn't spoken to. However, the owner completely changed his story from when I was laid off and claimed that I was not laid off but let go due to performance reasons (that I don't need to go into here).

Obviously I have filed an appeal and be granted one. I want to see what others say. To me what he discussed with the commission about my performance is irrelevant and if I were to discuss it I could fill them in on a number of things he left out - so it becomes a "he said" - "he said" situation. However, I have the letter I was given the day I was let go. I have sent this in as evidence to be used during the appeal. I want some people's opinions on this. Here was what the letter says verbatim.

"As stated at our meeting, the reason for termination of your employment is;

Corporate financial constraints stemming from economic conditions; and individual job performance that has been passable, but not exemplary."

To me the first part of the statement clearly entitles me to unemployment benefits. The second part seems to be contradictory. If my performance had anything to do with being laid off then why does it say my performance was "passable". Doesn't the word "passable" mean adequate, satisfactory, etc. Therefore how could my performance be a reason for dismissal. If my performance was a part of the reason shouldn't it state that my performance was inadequate, unacceptable or not passable. I also think that since he did not share this letter with the Commission that he clearly was intentionally hiding it because it does say that I was laid off for a reason that would entitle me to benefits.

So what are your opinions?

That very well could be interpreted as "we need to lay someone off, and with your performance issues, we chose you".

So does that mean I would be entitled to unemployment benefits or not?

Generally, performance issues do not disqualify you for UI benefits unless there is pretty substantial proof that you COULD have performed to standard and DELIBERATELY chose not to.

Corporate financial constraints stemming from economic conditions; and individual job performance that has been passable, but not exemplary." My take on it is that they selected you for layoff because other employees are better performers. Saying someone's performance is "passable" isn't exactly praise. No, this should not bar you from receiving unemployment benefits.