Were You Denied WI Unemployment in the Initial Determination? If You Appeal, Don’t Be Late!

If you are a Wisconsin worker who lost your initial determination for unemployment benefits, and you want to contest/appeal that decision, make sure you file your appeal on time, and before the deadline stated on the determination document.

An appeal can be submitted online at the unemployment division’s website (click here), or via a letter.  When submitting the appeal, you should be very careful to closely follow the instructions on the determination form, and– I’ll emphasize it again– to submit the appeal before the deadline.

The initial determination form you received will state the deadline, and the instructions for filing an appeal via internet or letter.

If an appeal is filed late, it is very difficult to get unemployment benefits. Wisconsin’s unemployment division does not accept most excuses for a late appeal, and usually will not accept late appeals.

Don’t procrastinate. File the appeal the same day you received the determination if possible. It does not take long, and most of the information in the appeal is very straight-forward. I have another post here about things to consider when submitting an appeal.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a Comment

Filed under Unemployment - Wisconsin

PBC Attorney Avi Berk Comments in NBC 26 Media| Family Upset Disabled Man Bullied In Workplace – www.nbc26.com

Media_httpmediajourna_otaba

PBC Attorney Avi Berk provided legal commentary in this NBC 26 article and video.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

An Excellent Article With Cites/Authority For Employee Rights Attorneys

For you employee rights attorneys out there who deal with federal summary judgment motions and common employer arguments, including those arguments that over-rely on the credibility of employer (interested) witnesses, this article is a must read:

Preserving the Right to a Jury Trial by Preventing Adverse Credibility Inferences at Summary Judgment,” by attorney Matthew C. Koski, of The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy.

This article has a very good discussion of the legal authority, and includes case law and cites that every employee rights attorney could use to help their employee-clients in federal summary judgment practice.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Philosophy - Employee Rights

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ www.dollarsordemocracy.org #WeThePeople

The U.S. Supreme Court claims that money is the same thing as speech. And now because of the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, huge corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. This decision opened the floodgates for corporate money to drown out the voices of real people in politics.

Join the online protest against corporate money drowning out the voices of real people. $peak out and update your status to:

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
bit.ly/DollarsOrDemocracy
#WeThePeople will #reclaim

Spread the word far and wide by clicking on the links below.

We The People

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

How Preparing to Be a Good Witness Is Like Weight Training

Charles A. Lindbergh on the witness stand.
Image via Wikipedia

When I prepare with an individual before a legal proceeding in which he or she will testify– say, for example, when I meet with a worker before a deposition or unemployment hearing– I discuss with that person what it means to be a good witness.

Being a good witness does not simply mean telling the truth, although that is certainly a necessary and important part of it.

Being a good witness also means work.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Googling for Legal Information: The Good and Bad

Perhaps you found this legal site’s webpage because you have a legal issue that you want free information about, and a Google search led you here.

As a consumer, I have often used a Google or other website searches to find free information.

Sometimes, that has been successful for me.  For example, my dryer once stopped running, so I did a web search, found a repair video for my particular dryer symptoms, and the video showed a fix (showed me how a dryer fuse was the likely culprit and how to install a new dryer fuse). So I followed the instructions to install a new fuse in my dryer and… it worked (!!).

For one cycle. Then my dryer went kaput again. So I was back at square one, and about $30 lighter for the new fuse that I’d purchased and ruined.

The fact my web-inspired dryer fix did not work does not itself mean the how-to- video was ineffective. In fact, my botched repair was almost certainly caused by my terrible repair skills more so than the video’s content. The video was in fact competent in diagnosing a problem like mine, and in advising a reasonable potential fix for my dryer’s symptoms. (When I later talked to a repairperson, he told me the video’s diagnosis and fix I saw were reasonable but just one of several potential matches for my dryer’s symptoms, and as it turned out, the wrong match).

I learned a lesson about internet searches and web-based fixes: sometimes, the nature of the problem– in my case, a $50-$500 problem of either repairing a dryer correctly and/or botching the fix and/or replacing the dryer– requires the actual presence and communication from someone who knows what they are doing.

The same is true of legal advice.

Doing a web search for legal information may be helpful to a certain extent.  A web search, for example, may tell you some laws and some important issues that you had not previously taken into account when considering your problem. It may make you a better-informed consumer.

However, if you take action based on that web information alone– without talking to an attorney about your legal situation– you may wind up with the legal equivalent of a botched dryer repair.  If the stakes involved are greater than a new dryer’s pricetag (which IS often the case with many legal situations, whether people realize it or not), then that’s all the more reason to get legal advice from an attorney as compared to a website.

Please note that does not mean I’m saying you must get MY legal advice, or that of any paid attorney, just that legal advice you’d get from a competent attorney (whether private, nonprofit etc.) beats website information however competent that information appears on its face.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Be Careful About Saying “Discrimination” In a WI Unemployment Proceeding– That Word Usually Has No Place There

As an employee rights attorney, I routinely represent Wisconsin workers in unemployment proceedings.

It is common for me to read unemployment-related documents, and to see that my client has (before s/he retained me), used the word “discrimination” in talking about the employer’s actions to the unemployment office.

And almost always when I see that word “discrimination” used during an unemployment matter, it is a bad thing for the employee.

Usually, whether an employer may have discriminated or not is irrelevant for an unemployment proceeding.

For example, the most common type of Wisconsin unemployment dispute I see is about whether the employee (NOT the employer) committed misconduct prior to job termination.  In other words, the whole issue for the unemployment proceeding is whether the employee did something really bad or not.

If an employee goes into a hearing or phone interview, the purpose of which is to decide whether the employee did something bad– and then the employee proceeds to point the finger at the employer to accuse it of doing something bad (e.g. “discrimination”)– that does not go over so well with the unemployment office.  Nor should it. The purpose of the hearing is for the employee’s conduct to be reviewed, not the employer’s bad conduct such discrimination etc.

With this said, there are a few limited unemployment law issues and circumstances where a WI worker does need to address what an employer did wrong. But usually, workers are not aware of or addressing those legal issues when they’re calling an employer “discriminatory.”  Usually, when a worker states that, the worker just feels the employer did wrong, and feels that an unemployment interviewer or judge will want to hear about that and/or will agree with that.

These are dangerous assumptions to make. You should not assume it is okay to talk about the employer’s “discrimination” unless you have reviewed and understand the legal standards, and know that what you’re saying is important under those legal standards. For most unemployment law standards (including discharge-for-misconduct as mentioned above), it is not necessary to mention “discrimination.”

Here is a list of Wisconsin unemployment legal issues and standards, at Wisconsin’s Department of Workforce Development’s website.

If you have a WI unemployment hearing coming up, chances are the hearing will cover one or more of these listed legal issues/standards.

Please consider reviewing the legal standards (or having a WI unemployment attorney brief you about them) before you decide to tell the unemployment office that your employer was “discriminatory”, or before you otherwise bring up topics concerning what you feel the employer did wrong.

While it is understandable that such things may be on your mind– and may well be true in some instances– you do not want to be offering up information that the unemployment office will find unnecessary and/or harmful to your own case.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a Comment

Filed under Unemployment - Wisconsin