Unemployment Benefits

September 2004:

A farmworker was laid off last season. In order for the worker to get his last paycheck, the employer forced him to sign a statement saying that he voluntarily quit. He collected several months of unemployment benefits before the employer submitted the signed statement to the Unemployment Insurance Agency as evidence that the worker had quit and was thus ineligible for unemployment benefits. The worker was notified that he would not get any more benefits and that he had to pay back the benefits he had already received.  FLS is representing the worker as he appeals the denial of his unemployment benefits. Any farm workers who have questions about eligibility for unemployment should contact FLS.

April 2004:

- We assisted a migrant farmworker in applying for unemployment benefits last fall before returning to Texas. The Unemployment Insurance Agency (UIA) initially denied her claim, saying that she needed to earn a certain amount of income since she quit one of her farm labor jobs in 2003. We appealed and proved that the client did earn the amount that UIA required. UIA reversed its decision and granted our client her unemployment benefits, which totaled about $2,100.

- A farmworker informed us that she was not receiving her unemployment benefits. We discovered that the reason was that last year she had informed the Unemployment office that she was temporarily unable to work due to medical reasons. We told the client that she needed to obtain medical records that showed that she was able to return to work last year. After she obtained those records, we send them to the Unemployment office, which approved her benefits. She obtained almost 5 months of benefits to which she was entitled, which totaled over $1,800.

August 2003: FLS has helped many farmworkers with unemployment problems this year. The closure of almost all of the local unemployment offices caused hardships to many farmworkers, most of whom are primarily Spanish-speakers and were not able to receive help from Unemployment’s telephone "help" line. Here are some examples of cases in which FLS assisted:

· A farmworker was improperly denied unemployment benefits because the State unilaterally designated him a "seasonal employee" because of where he worked. FLS helped the farmworker appeal, and he ultimately received over $3,000 in benefits because he was not a seasonal employee.

· Another farmworker was not credited her proper wage credits for the past year. Following FLS’ advocacy on her behalf, she received over $2,500 in withheld unemployment benefits.

· An elderly and functionally illiterate farmworker had been penalized over $3,000 in restitution for alleged "intentional withholding of information to obtain benefits." He was exonerated following an appeal hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, who concluded that, "The claimant with his low education level did not understand the MARVIN process which even the employer acknowledged not understanding."

· A farmworker filed for unemployment in 2000, and was told by the State that her employer said she never worked there. In order to prove that she worked there, the worker brought her pay stubs to the Unemployment office in 2000 and was told everything was fine. In 2002, she received a decision from Unemployment stating that she owed a $2,000 recoupment because the State again didn't believe she worked for that employer. FLS helped her file a late appeal and she had a hearing with an Administrative Law Judge, who found that the farmworker had good cause for her late appeal due to the closure of the Unemployment offices, and also found that our client did work for the employer, so she did not have to pay a recoupment.

· A farmworker was denied unemployment benefits because the State alleged that he was unavailable for work due to being in Texas for several weeks. FLS helped him protest that decision, since he was still looking for work in Texas and available to return to Michigan at any time, and the Unemployment office reversed its decision and granted him several hundred dollars of back benefits.

2002: Unemployment Compensation - Family Medical Leave Act
     FLS successfully represented a client who was initially denied unemployment benefits because her employer, a meat-packing operation in Grand Rapids, contended that she was fired for misconduct.  At a hearing, the judge found that the employer had granted her leave under the Family Medical Leave Act, but that the employer did not clearly state whether she could take a previously-planned vacation following her medical leave.  Our client, who only speaks Spanish, thought that her vacation was approved.  The judge held that our client did not commit misconduct and decided the case in her favor.  Our client received a check for back unemployment benefits in the amount of $2,400.