- Holidays...To Pay or Not to Pay, What is Required
- EEOC Update on COVID-19
- Protection of Employee Health Information
- Civil Rights Win for LGBTQ Employees
- OSHA Recordkeeping Requirements During the COVID-19 Pandemic
- The Line Between At-Will Termination and Wrongful Termination
- Regulating Firearms in the Workplace
- Social Media Use in Hiring
- What Not to Wear
- Vicarious Liability for Unlawful Harrassment
- Employee Surveillance & Union Formation
- A Lesson in Retaliation
- Employers May Sometimes Judge a Book By Its Cover
- Mind Your P’s and Q’s . . . and BFOQs
- Severance Agreements
- U.S. Department of Labor "Paid" Program
- Revisiting Records Retention
- Calculating the Regular Rate
- Independent Contractor or Employee?
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- DRI Membership: It’s Personal
- Is Extended Leave a Reasonable Accommodation?
- Parental Leave
- Pay Disparity
- Religious accomodation in the workplace
- Equal pay and prior salary information
- I quit! How to avoid constructive discharge
- You Can't Shred Email
- Navigating Unemployment Claims
- Considering Criminal History in Pre-Employment Decisions
- Defamation Claims from Former Employees
- Mixed Motive Causation
- Requesting Accomodation: Kowitz v. Trinity Health
- Antitrust Law in Human Resources
- An Evolving Standard: Joint-Employment
- What Does At-Will Employment Mean for Employers?
- Let's Talk About Wages
- THE FLSA: CHANGES ARE COMING
- Follow Up: Obesity and the ADA
- The Importance of Social Media Policies
- Is Obesity a Qualifying Disability under the ADA?
- Retaliation on the Rise: The EEOC Responds
- What Motivates You?
- "But I thought ...
- Who’s expecting? And what is he expecting?
- Are You Still Doing Annual Performance Reviews?
- Who is Your Employee?
- The unpaid intern trap Part II
- “We’ve been the victim of a cyber-attack”
- So, a Hasidic Jew, a nun in a habit and a woman wearing a headscarf walk into your office?
- The unpaid intern trap
- Pregnancy in the workplace
- Let's talk about honesty.
- "Did You Know" Series - Part I
- Conducting an Internal Investigation
- What HR can look forward to in 2015!
- The chokehold of workplace technology
- Does your company have trade secrets?
- North Dakota Construction Law Compendium for 2014
- Does the North Dakota baby boom affect you?
- Ban the Box? Why?
- The end of the world as we know it
- Everybody has an opinion
- Changes, Changes, Changes!
- Nick Grant presents at North Dakota Safety Council's 41st Annual Safety and Health Conference
- Email impairment: A potentially harmful condition
- Are Employers Required to Give Stressed-Out Employees Time Off?
- Can you obtain a credit report when investigating employee wrongdoing?
- Can’t we just sidestep the ACA?
- Should Your Employees Telecommute? Part III
- Should Your Employees Telecommute? Part II
- Should Your Employees Telecommute?
- Proper Investigation of Employee Misconduct
- Battles in the Wellness War
- Rules are rules! Aren’t they?
- What's going on in Bismarck
- A glimpse ahead
- Obesity as a disability under the ADA – reweighing the issue
- What’s next for your business under the Affordable Care Act?
- Criminal Background Checks
- Becoming a lawyer is a process, not an event [Section 5 of 5]
- Congress Says Yes To North Slope Energy Jobs Bill
- Test Your Knowledge of Social Media Policies and Employee Discipline
- Becoming a lawyer is a process, not an event [Section 4 of 5]
- What Every Employer Needs to Know About the NLRA
- Will the 2012 Elections Make A Difference
- Where There's Smoke...
- Dress Code Etiquette: Is Casual Friday Becoming Freaky Friday
- The Next Disaster May Be Yours
- Hostile Work Environment Claims
- North Dakota Employment Law Links
- There's An App For That
- Am I a “Business Associate”? Why Should I Care?
- Do You Recognize a Cat's Paw When You See One?
- Cell Phones Can Cost a Lot, Part II
- Becoming a lawyer is a process, not an event [Section 3 of 5]
- Cell Phones Can Cost a Lot, Part I
- The Economy - What HR Professionals Need To Know
- Becoming a lawyer is a process, not an event [Section 2 of 5]
- Three New Challenges For HR Professionals
Navigating Unemployment ClaimsBy: Allison Mann
Making the decision to terminate an employee can be difficult and is riddled with potential potholes. One such situation that an employer may be faced with arises after the termination is complete—a claim for unemployment insurance benefits. In many cases, the former employee is entitled to receive these benefits. However, in others, benefits are not warranted. It is oftentimes difficult for an employer to decide how to respond to a notice of an unemployment claim. The purpose of this article is to educate employers as to possible grounds for disputing a former employee’s claim.
The North Dakota Unemployment Insurance ProgramThe purpose of the Unemployment Insurance Program in North Dakota (the “Program”) is to provide qualifying individuals with a temporary source of income after they are terminated from a job through no fault of their own. It is meant as a stopgap between losing one job and finding another. North Dakota employers pay taxes into the Program in order to finance the future benefits paid to terminated workers.
The ClaimWhen a former employee makes a claim for unemployment benefits, Job Service sends a Notice of Claim to the employer to let it know that the former employee is filing a claim. The Notice includes general information about what the claimant’s assertions. Job Service recommends that employers respond to this Notice if the claimant was separated from employment for any reason other than lack of work. The Notice will set out specific questions which will help Job Service make a determination regarding the validity of the claim. Employers should react promptly to any Notices received. The deadlines for responses and appeals in the unemployment claims process run quickly. Even a short delay in response can result in missing a deadline and forfeiting important rights.
Grounds for Rejection of a ClaimThere are several reasons that Job Service may reject an individual’s claim for unemployment benefits. A greater understanding of these reasons can help an employer when responding. Two common grounds for disqualification that an employer may assert disqualifies the employee for benefits are:
In PracticeThere are benefits to opposing wrongly filed unemployment claims. Amounts the employer is required to pay into unemployment are linked to the claims that employer has against it. Additionally, it provides the employer with the chance to clear up any facts asserted by the claimant that it may not agree with. There can also be risks. For instance, there may be a chance that the claimant plans to bring a discrimination lawsuit against the company. If so, there could be a possibility that the claimant will use certain evidence filed in the unemployment action as evidence of discrimination or the violation of another law.
It is important to evaluate these issues before presenting evidence. It is advised that you contact an employment law expert to evaluate the claim and give advice relating to the response in order to ensure that no important rights are being forfeited.
Our Interest in Serving You:My law firm’s goal is to give understandable information and to foster discussion about real-life issues facing human resource professionals. If we are not achieving that goal or if you would like us to address other employment law issues, please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. We promise to take your comments and ideas to heart.
(Otherwise known as “the fine print”)
Reprinted with permission from an article submitted for publication in the April, 2017Southwest Area Human Resource Association newsletter.