No announcement yet.

Denied Unemployment after car broke down Georgia

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Denied Unemployment after car broke down Georgia

    I've got a bit of an unusual situation.

    My car inexplicably died on me enroute to work. I notified my supervisor
    immediately and was asked to keep her informed. The next day the car
    was looked at by the dealership and was told that it looked like the problem
    was with the engine. Again, I talked with the area supervisor and was told
    because I'd already missed two days that he was going to take me off the
    schedule until further notice. I agreed that that was probably best and would
    let them know something once I did.

    Basically, the dealership called me every day to let me know what was going
    on. They thought it was the timing chain but it turned out that the timing
    chain breaking was just a symptom. The engine would have to be replaced
    but luckily it was still under warranty for another month or so. At this point, I
    was on the warranty inspector's time waiting for them to come out and approve
    repairs. I notified my bosses that I was waiting for them to come out and inspect
    the vehicle which would take a few days.

    At first, they refused to approve repairs. At this point, I was desperate and just
    wanted the car fixed so I could get back to work. I couldn't get a ride to work
    with any family members, my wife neither drives nor owns a second car, and I
    don't live on any bus routes nor do I own a valid credit card with which to
    purchase a rental. My insurance only covers rentals due to accidents not
    mechanical failure. Anyway, I called the dealership up but the technician was
    out to lunch so I did something stupid and drastic and left my checkcard number
    on the machine in hopes that they would go ahead and order a replacement engine.
    Well, the technician understood my frustration and erased the message. He said
    he'd talk to the warranty company. They sent out a *second* inspector who finally
    approved the repairs. I called my boss and let her know that they expected to have
    my car ready the following Tuesday.

    Well, problems arose with the replacement engine but they were still able to
    finish repairs by the end of business Tuesday. I drove to my workplace and spoke
    with my boss using the store phone. I was told to call the area supervisor and set up
    a meeting. After a day of not getting in touch with me, he finally returned my call and
    we met Thursday morning. I appeared in full uniform and was ready to work after the
    meeting if needed. After explaining the situation to him, I was told that I shouldn't
    have missed more than one day of work and was being fired on that basis. I was never
    warned or given an ultimatum...just to keep them informed and that I had been removed
    from the schedule for the time being. I didn't argue and I walked out gracefully.

    However, after spending nearly two months applying and certifying for unemployment
    benefits, I received a notice in the mail saying I was disqualified for "failure to follow rules,
    orders, or instructions." I have immediately applied for an appeal.

    I didn't miss work through any fault of my own and there was no deliberate intent. I needed
    my job for many reasons and did everything in my power to try and keep it. My unique set
    of circumstances simply didn't allow me to get to work. I'm not denying they had grounds to
    fire me but to deny me unemployment?

    What should I do? Are there any specific details/evidence I should gather for my appeal and
    what chances do I really have?

    Thanks in advance for any advice.

    Last edited by MBisbee; 03-18-2009, 11:13 AM.

  • #2
    I didn't miss work through any fault of my own
    Yes you did, who's responsibility is it to get to work?

    I'm not denying they had grounds to fire me but to deny me unemployment?
    The Company can't deny your claim, they contest it, which I would have done as well, but the state makes the final determination.

    what chances do I really have?
    In my opinion slim to none, but keep the appeal going as it costs you nothing and sometimes you just never know.

    I can't exactly tell from your post but how many workdays did you miss during this mess?
    "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate'' - Sir William of Ockham, a.k.a. Ockham's Razor


    • #3
      Originally posted by Eng&SafetyMGR View Post
      Yes you did, who's responsibility is it to get to work?

      I can't exactly tell from your post but how many workdays did you miss during this mess?
      Just over two weeks but I reported on the progress every step of the way and was never informed that I'd be fired. I'd never have even bothered to schedule a meeting or been in such a hurry to get my car back if I'd known that to be the case. I was under the impression that my job had been put "on hold" until I could come back. The company handbook even states that "termination should never come as a surprise to the employee".



      • #4
        Just over two weeks
        That's a lot of time

        I was under the impression that my job had been put "on hold" until I could come back.
        Obviously it wasn't, why that wasn't communicated to you I don't know

        The company handbook even states that "termination should never come as a surprise to the employee".
        That it legally meaningless, however it would seem to me that if I couldn't get to work for 2 weeks because my car broke down it wouldn't be a suprise when I'm terminated.

        Look, it boils down to this. You created this entire situation. You had no back up plans in the event of this possibility. Give your best effort towards your appeal and hope for the best.
        "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate'' - Sir William of Ockham, a.k.a. Ockham's Razor


        • #5
          Surprise Termination.

          Well I think it's hilarious to hear some of the people posing as someone who could give this person advice.

          Your situation would be much more interesting had the company required you actually use your car for company business.

          But besides all that, you didn't quit. They terminated you. You didn't willfully violate their rules. You simply could not meet with their attendance requirements.

          I would think you would or have already won your appeal.

          Companies are scum in America anymore. Seriously what's the guy going to get ? A couple hundred a week for 13 weeks? Big Freaking deal .


          • #6
            Well, even though this post is 4 months old, I'm going to correct some information posted by budhak0n.

            First of all, the maximum time one can receive unemployment is 26 weeks, not 13. Plus, there are now federal and state extensions of up to 53 additional weeeks in Georgia. Additionally, although the minimum benefit in Georgia is only $44, the maximum is $330. So it could be more than "a couple hundred". And lastly, the more benefits that are chargeable to an employer, the higher their UI tax rate goes the following year. This is not a "no-cost" benefit on the employer's side, and prudent employers will protest a claim for benefits when the reason for the separation is due solely to the actions of the employee.

            Any employee who can't get to work for two weeks because he has not made backup transportation arrangements would be fired by the great majority of employer for job abandonment.
            I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.


            • #7
              Oh Thanks for the Correction.

              By the way, which Law School are you a graduate of exactly?

              In many states if not all states, the initial collection period is 13 weeks and then through an entirely different statutory authority if a worker is unable to find gainful employment they qualify you for an additional 13 weeks.

              Also, why in the world ANY Employer would have any interest whatsoever in what a potential claimants rights would be under State UC laws is comparable to a multi billionaire having sincere interest in the bargaining rights of a cooperative condominium association located in an inner city empowerment zone.

              In the United States, the relationship between "employer" and "employee" has become increasingly strained due to the attempts of "employer" to continually infringe upon and ridiculously classify the work product of their employees.

              In the past Century, Tort rights which were a part of every citizens rights under common law have been substantially curtailed by Worker's compensation statutes. Labor laws and Labor Unions since the 1980's have been forcibly broken and politicized by interests who have absolutely NO interest in the end product presented to the Public.

              Job abandonment? What exactly is this? Oh you mean when somebody doesn't show up for a meaningless job classification because the cost of attendance is higher than the benefit conveyed upon the worker.

              Yeah call it whatever you want. It's BS.

              So stop with your internet "lawyering". LOL


              • #8
                You don't have to be an attorney to read the pamphlet from the state.

                You don't have to be an attorney to know the a lot of companies in this economy are barely keeping their heads above water.

                You don't have to be an attorney to represent your company in a UI hearing.
                I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.


                • #9
                  This board is staffed by volunteers who have worked in HR for a lot of years.
                  If you dont like the answer, fine. Dont denigrate the volunteers who are trying to help people.
                  Your attitude is not called for here.
                  I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have.
                  Thomas Jefferson


                  • #10
                    Trying to "HELP" people.. Hmmmm.

                    Wow well for one thing I find it interesting that this sort of thing goes on in the state of Georgia considering one of Georgia's down home corporate faves is (deleted).

                    A company who is a known repeat offender of just about everything you can dig up. Wow could someone use this post and sue me for Libel? I'd welcome the defense of that case LOL.

                    Oh ok, now the question you have to ask yourself is what sort of corporation hires people and tells them your "job" will be to help people help themselves by staffing the HR department.

                    One would think that if your expertise were in the field of "Labor" law that perhaps several years of practice in such an area of expertise would be a prerequisite. Or maybe you might have worked for the NLRB or a state department of labor and so on.

                    But yet when people get in trouble. The "company" always hides behind a corporate veil and the sneaky little pathetic yapping of someone trying to appeal to their own skewed sense of proper behavior.

                    And the Employee, the one who had no bargaining rights whatsoever and nothing to do with that pretty little employee manual you've drawn up in your wasted years of HR "practice", has to go find who? Yep a private attorney.

                    Little word of advice for all you HR "experts". In the future when attempting to write legal documents which are to be used in relations between an employee and a company, it might be a good idea to actually collectively Bargain with the employee group or classification which you wish to bind with your documentation.

                    Employee "handbooks" nowadays read as exactly what they are. A one sided document written by a company or it's management for the benefit of the company and or it's management because quite simply people who like to hold themselves out as HR had nothing better to do but waste their time drafting documents or even worse STUDYING documents that were in no way shape or form "bargained" or in any way agreed upon by the parties they purport to bind.

                    It would be like me writing my auto insurance policy to say that every six months I'll pay 1200 but in the case that my car needs gas in the first or any successive month thereafter the insurer must pay me back 300 per month throughout the entire 6 month period.

                    Stuff pamphlets full of self effacing and obvious circumstances and then claim they represent a fair exchange between worker and employer.

                    Hilarious. And I really try to be fair minded when evaluating union activity.
                    Last edited by cbg; 07-16-2009, 07:17 AM.


                    • #11
                      Do you have a purpose in being here, other than to offend the responders?
                      The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.


                      • #12
                        Offend the Responders?

                        I'm telling the Person who worked for a company for my guess would be a considerable period of time that just because somebody has told him he shouldn't be entitled to UI, Especially somebody from the company,

                        THAT PERSON should never ever take the advice of someone on this board who tells him that what he did constitutes "job" abandonment.

                        You don't know anything about the guy. Perhaps the guy worked for this employer for 5-8 years and due to the skimpy nature of the employer he couldn't afford to purchase reliable transportation.

                        Maybe the guy tried to obtain a rental car and for whatever reason was rebuked as a "credit" risk.

                        Maybe the guy was a good employee so long as the legal situation benefitted the rights of the "EMPLOYER" but the second he asked for some benefit which benefitted him, the "employee" ...

                        You then chose to attempt to belittle him telling him how it's all his fault for being so "short-sighted".

                        Like I said, and I stand by it 100%. Companies and more particularly professional HR are the scum of american business today.