Part V: Why Your School Should Protest All Unemployment Claims

Often in dealing with unemployment claims, I am told to “deny someone benefits” or “not to protest” a particular claim. And, although I fully intend to follow what I interpret to be my client’s wishes, I cannot guarantee the outcome they request. To us, the best outcome is for benefits to be denied so you pay nothing. But, sometimes for various reasons, we are requested to do something differently.

One of the funniest things for me to hear is that “we” denied somebody unemployment benefits. OPSUCA certainly doesn’t have that power, although wouldn’t it be nice if we did? It’s important to remember when dealing with the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission (OESC) that it is the OESC only that can determine if someone is allowed or denied benefits.

On the other end, we are sometimes asked not to protest a claim. Typically, this seems to be because the school feels bad for the former employee or believes the former employee deserves it. Another reason might be to hopefully pay the former employee to make him or her “go away.” Or, perhaps the community might become upset if the former employee is jobless and destitute.

Although these might be worth considering from time to time when looking at the big picture, it’s important to remember that neither OPSUCA nor the school has any real control over who gets benefits and who doesn’t. We can simply make arguments in our favor based on experience and knowledge of the law.

The common response from OPSUCA back to the school’s “no protest” request is to think it over carefully. Please consider that the school will likely end up paying up to $7,400 for this claim. In most cases, when school administration is faced with a decision as to who deserves $7,400 more between the kids and the former employee, it is often decided to go forward with the protest to protect the school’s limited monetary resources. Ultimately, that is OPSUCA’s primary goal – to save schools money.

Besides the monetary reason, there are a couple more reasons to always protest an unemployment claim.

Not protesting is frowned upon by the Powers that Be – the OESC

When dealing with the government, it is correct to assume that processes should operate based on the truth. The OESC is charged to oversee unemployment claims by listening to both sides (the employer and former employee) to come up with what seems to be the truth. The truth is applied to the law, and the outcome is made.

Along the lines of claims, the first piece of advice given to employers by the OESC to keep unemployment costs down is to “Protest all claims where the separation was due to a reason other than lack of work.” OES-175 Guide (rev.4-22-10) at p. 28. The reason for this is that the unemployment system is not made up to simply provide unemployment to anyone and everyone who applies. There is a complex set of laws and rules set up to govern when someone is allowed and when not allowed.

As mentioned above, it is the OESC that makes the ultimate decision. So, when a school fails to participate honestly in a claim by stating it doesn’t wish to protest rather than telling what really happened, the school is being untruthful. I hate to put it that way, but that is how it’s viewed.

I have seen some resignation agreements in the past that state the school is not going to protest any unemployment claim. This is a bad idea. It is never a good idea to lie to the government. Therefore, it is always our advice to be honest with the facts of what happened at the end of employment relationship. Further, it’s not a good idea to use unemployment as a bargaining chip, because . . .

Even if you Don’t Protest, the Former Employee Might Still Lose

I’ve seen it time and again. The school asks that the claim not be protested, and the request is followed by providing limited information to the OESC. Then, the former employee stomps up to the school and makes a scene in the school administration office yelling that the school said it would not protest but it did. The school insists it did not protest. Mass confusion erupts. What happened?

The OESC did its job. It listened to both sides, and although the school provided little to no information, the former employee provided the truth. And, it was based on the truth that the OESC decided to deny benefits. My guess is that former employees get overly confident that the school won’t protest so they think they can blab all they want to the OESC about what happened. Well, the OESC is not bound to a promise made by the school not to protest. So, you end up looking like the bad guy when you might really have thought you were helping.

So, in closing, I’ll encourage again to always protest your unemployment claims and provide all information required. What I know through working with schools is that school people are good people. You want to do what is fair and best for your school. And, you might decide on occasion that you don’t want to protest an unemployment claim, but please beware that it’s out of your control. So, it’s best to participate fully and wholly to place the decision-making in the hands of the OESC. Let them take the blame for a denied claim. And, you’ve then fulfilled your obligation to your community, school, and kids.

Dollar$ & Sen$e is written by the Director of OPSUCA, Jessica Sherrill. This series was originally published in the OSSBA Journal and is being reprinted here for your convenience and easy accessability.