I was a cocktail waitress at the Sands Casino for 26 years. When closure was imminent, Unemployment representatives came and explained the unemployment process. Weekly, I collected $415. In April, 2007 I got a hostess job at a country club. The hourly pay was $10/hr. I was scheduled from 20-30 hours per week, as per business needs. I thought this was full time for that position. When I was a cocktail waitress, 30 hour weeks were full time. So I told Unemployment I was full time and stopped collecting. In Dec. when my hours were cut, I reopened my case and again received $400+ per week. In April, 2008 I resumed what I thought was full time. And told Unemployment this. And, again, in Dec. my hours were cut. When I reopened my case, I was alloted $167/wk. So, I contacted Unemployment who explained how the system worked. I appealed, sending a letter and faxing it. A woman from Unemployment called me to understand my weekly hours as I had sent a list of my paychecks for 2-wk periods as they were listed. She very patiently sat on the phone and we went over each week-hours and pay. Then she asked if I'd read the blue book that comes with the paper work for opening a new claim. I admitted I'd not as I'd gone to 3 of those classes at the Sands to make sure I got it right. She explained that now I was ineligible to receive any consideration as I'd admitted I'd not read that book. So, again, I appealed. This time to the Appeals Tribunal. On April 1, a woman called and explained how unemployment amounts were based on a particular block of time. I explained that I thought that if I didn't take the full amount of money that was alloted to me, it would be there when I needed it. The woman explained it had I read the blue book... So I said I wanted to appeal the whole system. She said it would take 6-8 months. But within the hour, she called back and said my telephone appeal to the Board of Review would be on 4/16. I've been told that both the rollover money concept and my misunderstanding would not win my case. I need a legal angle or to prove and Unemployment was remiss in their explanation. So, my question is: What can I use for a basis for a monetary ruling by Unemployment? I know I asked this yesterday, but I can't find my question under any of your headings.

Your claim runs from one date to the same date one year later and no more. If you don't use all your allotted benefits in that calendar year, they are lost forever. The fact you went past your year of benefits where you were collecting the $400 per week and now have a new claim where your benefits are now $167 a week tells me that you did not "re-open" your case but started a brand new benefit year.

I do not forsee you winning back your $400 a week benefits as the time frame came and went where you were eligible to collect that amount. And no, the benefits do not just sit there after the benefit year ends either.

I know this is confusing but never having collected UI you would not understand their program right off the bat. One time I was collecting UI and my benefit was say $300 a week. Then my year of benefits came and went and when I collected my new claim my benefits were reduced to say $200 a week. I was able to ascertain that what they call the "benefit year" calculation was from such and such date to so and so date and that my earnings were $____. The higher benefit I received was calculated from a completely different dateline and I was obviously making more money weekly during that period and this resulted in a higher weekly benefit amount.

Unfortunately, they are correct and you will not prevail in your appeal due to the amounts and dates involved in determining your weekly benefit amount. Not having read the book is not grounds for an appeal. The grounds for appeal would have to pertain to an incorrect calculation on their part and I honestly don't think that they miscalculated your benefit amount. Also, was your state one of the states that had the Extended Benefits available? You would have had to re-open your claim within a certain calendar date or forefit those additional benefits.

I know what you're saying, twinkiedotter. I learned all this the hard way. I am on my 4th step in the appeal process. I'm searching for a loophole. Also, I have co-workers from the Sands who are on their 3rd extension who have NEVER looked for a job. They felt they were financially solvent and the extension money is a bonus. Granted this whole situation evolved from my own stupidity. I'm just trying to find a feasible answer for my upcoming appeal.

Have you read the book yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearfoot4

I know what you're saying, twinkiedotter. I learned all this the hard way. I am on my 4th step in the appeal process. I'm searching for a loophole. Also, I have co-workers from the Sands who are on their 3rd extension who have NEVER looked for a job. They felt they were financially solvent and the extension money is a bonus. Granted this whole situation evolved from my own stupidity. I'm just trying to find a feasible answer for my upcoming appeal.

---

I hear what you're saying but basically since you did go back to work and changed your base earnings versus you kept getting extensions there is no "loophole" that I can think of that would effectively win your appeal. The other folks just kept getting extended and you chose to get a job instead. Yes, I know this is not fair, but this is legal on the part of UI to do this denial. Kind of makes you wonder are they punishing the folks who want to work versus the ones who stay home. The government is the government and they have certain set rules they must abide by. Sorry. It's too late now to "go back" and sit at home on your rumpus and not work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justwantfair

Have you read the book yet?

---

Yes... I've thoroughly read the book, much to my dismay. Oh, I know I'm tilting at windmills, but this is a good amount of money in question. I've been told the only defense is if I can find a legal loophole in my conversations with the first levels of unemployment personal. Which I can't. So the only thing I can think to try is to explain that I thought I was full-time. When I was a cocktail waitress, 30 hrs. was full time. In this job, I am the only hostess and am working all hours offered to me. So I thought I was full time. Isn't 40 hr. work weeks somewhat arbitrary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justwantfair

Have you read the book yet?

---

When you asked if I'd read the book yet, I was hoping for words of wisdom. Do you have any??

Full time is usually 40 hours or possibly 38 hours at some companies. I never heard of 30 hours a week being full time.

I know this is hindsight but I think you should hear it anyway.

When you first got on UI and started collecting the $400 a week and when you got the job as a cocktail waitress you could have STILL filed your weekly claim even if you made more than the $400 a week claim amount. At $10 an hour that would have been $300. You could have kept collecting on the claim until your year was up and then filed for an extension and kept collecting on that extension. But what you did was the HONORABLE thing - you dropped your UI claim instead of collecting the extra $100 a week in benefits.

Unfortunately, I really don't see you prevailing at your appeal.

Yes, the rules are fairly clear and available, you chose not to read the rules or make an effort.

The only way to make an appeal work is to find a reason within their rules.

I lost my appeal with the Board of Review. My next step is the Supreme Court. I recently received an email about immigrants over 65 being elible for SSI & Medicaid. It also said that an immigrant over 65 is eligible for $1890/mo. SSI+$580/mo. In social assistance. The email is not substantiated, but making the rounds nonetheless. I'm thinking how I could tie that in with my situation and examine the likelihood of their having read the blue book. Any thoughts or ideas? I'm desparate>

If you are over aged 62 (or will turn 62 in a month or so) you can go to the Social Security office locally and apply to receive Social Security Retirement. In essence you can retire early. If that is the case then you will be able to at least collect some money each month.

I don't know about the email nonsense you got as you could not collect SSI ontop of SSR

If you do chose to retire early at age 62 please be advised that you will not be able to earn more than $1,080 per month on top of whatever your SSR monthly amount is otherwise you will have a penalty with SSR. If you want to collect UI and still receive SSR, that is allowable in certain states. Would suggest that you contact both SS and UI to make sure that you can collect both at the same time.

Please also be advised that if, for instance, you will turn 62 in August, your first SSR payment would be in September and payable in October. That's hard but that's the government for you.

Also they have tons of other rules about working when you are under 65 but if you are over 65 and start collecting, then the rules are zip. You can work all you want and not lose any benefits when you are over 65. Your monthy income can be well in excess of $1080 in addition to the SSR benefits paid out.

Here is their official website. Social Security Online - The Official Website of the U.S. Social Security Administration

Sorry you lost your appeal.