On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:46:13 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Sep 6, 10:35*am, "
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:09:59 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On Sep 5, 10:51*pm, "
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:31:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 19:32:10 -0400, "
wrote:

It's amazing that you believed that your very limited experience had any
relevance to the rest of the world around you.

The laws that apply to my company apply to everyone in the states that
I'm familiar with. *Probably others.

You are clearly clueless about the matter. *It is quite possible to receive UI
insurance after being fired or even quitting. *In fact, it's not rare at all.
It simply depends on the facts behind the separation.

It may not be rare, but it's not the typical or common case. *If you
just get ****ed off or don't like your job and quit, absent coming up
with some bogus story, you don't get unemployment. *And once the
story is vetted, very likely you're not getting it anyway. *Most
people
who quit or are fired don't do so after a period of documented
sexual harrassment or labor law violation. *They quit because they
don't like the job. Or the boss fires them with documented evidence
of them not showing up for work, being repeatedly warned, etc.

Strawmen are easy, huh?

The fact is that it's rather common for people to receive UI after being fired
or resigning. *Again, it's all in the facts behind the case. *For instance,
it's not unheard of, in "at will" states, for someone to be fired without
cause. *It's also not uncommon for people to be fired for incompetence (after
clearly having been evidenced by the fact that they were in the job). *Both
are eligible for UI. *Basically, if someone is fired, or resigns, for reasons
beyond their control, they *are* eligible for UI.

Here is a site that has some discussion of this:http://www.helium.com/items/313125-c...-insurance...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of course the problem there is that nothing there says that
it's common for someone who quits or is fired for cause to qualify for
and receive unemployment. Does it happen, sure if you can prove some
extenuating circumstances.

If you read it, it's clearly *not* extenuating circumstances. If the employee
is not at fault, UI is payable. It really is that simple.

But you're claiming that Ed's experience
where no one that quit at his company ever received unemployment
insurance, is irrelevant or unusual. I say it's not unusual.

No, I'm saying that his experience is irrelevant. The facts differ.

On Sep 6, 11:00*am, "
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:46:13 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On Sep 6, 10:35*am, "
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:09:59 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
On Sep 5, 10:51*pm, "
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:31:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 19:32:10 -0400, "
wrote:

It's amazing that you believed that your very limited experience had any
relevance to the rest of the world around you.

The laws that apply to my company apply to everyone in the states that
I'm familiar with. *Probably others.

You are clearly clueless about the matter. *It is quite possible to receive UI
insurance after being fired or even quitting. *In fact, it's not rare at all.
It simply depends on the facts behind the separation.

It may not be rare, but it's not the typical or common case. *If you
just get ****ed off or don't like your job and quit, absent coming up
with some bogus story, you don't get unemployment. *And once the
story is vetted, very likely you're not getting it anyway. *Most
people
who quit or are fired don't do so after a period of documented
sexual harrassment or labor law violation. *They quit because they
don't like the job. Or the boss fires them with documented evidence
of them not showing up for work, being repeatedly warned, etc.

Strawmen are easy, huh?

The fact is that it's rather common for people to receive UI after being fired
or resigning. *Again, it's all in the facts behind the case. *For instance,
it's not unheard of, in "at will" states, for someone to be fired without
cause. *It's also not uncommon for people to be fired for incompetence (after
clearly having been evidenced by the fact that they were in the job). *Both
are eligible for UI. *Basically, if someone is fired, or resigns, for reasons
beyond their control, they *are* eligible for UI.

Here is a site that has some discussion of this:http://www.helium.com/items/313125-c...surance...Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of course the problem there is that nothing there says that
it's common for someone who quits or is fired for cause to qualify for
and receive unemployment. *Does it happen, sure if you can prove some
extenuating circumstances.

If you read it, it's clearly *not* extenuating circumstances. If the employee
is not at fault, UI is payable. It really is that simple.

Read what? It isn't that simple. If an employee quits just because he
just doesn't feel like working any more, he isn't at fault. And in
the vast majority of cases, he isn't going to collect unemployment
because it was his choice to quit.

Now can the employee come up with some BS story, about
sexual harrassment, unsafe work conditions, the employer
firing him as opposed to him just quiting, etc and get some
review board somewhere to let him collect? Sure. But it
isn't typical. Which was Ed's point that in the cases he
was involved in, he never saw it happen.





But you're claiming that Ed's experience
where no one that quit at his company ever received unemployment
insurance, is irrelevant or unusual. * I say it's not unusual.

No, I'm saying that his experience is irrelevant. *The facts differ.- Hide quoted text -


I see, but of course if it were YOUR experience, then it would
be directly relevant, right?

On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 18:34:53 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Sep 6, 11:00*am, "
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:46:13 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On Sep 6, 10:35*am, "
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:09:59 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
On Sep 5, 10:51*pm, "
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:31:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 19:32:10 -0400, "
wrote:

It's amazing that you believed that your very limited experience had any
relevance to the rest of the world around you.

The laws that apply to my company apply to everyone in the states that
I'm familiar with. *Probably others.

You are clearly clueless about the matter. *It is quite possible to receive UI
insurance after being fired or even quitting. *In fact, it's not rare at all.
It simply depends on the facts behind the separation.

It may not be rare, but it's not the typical or common case. *If you
just get ****ed off or don't like your job and quit, absent coming up
with some bogus story, you don't get unemployment. *And once the
story is vetted, very likely you're not getting it anyway. *Most
people
who quit or are fired don't do so after a period of documented
sexual harrassment or labor law violation. *They quit because they
don't like the job. Or the boss fires them with documented evidence
of them not showing up for work, being repeatedly warned, etc.

Strawmen are easy, huh?

The fact is that it's rather common for people to receive UI after being fired
or resigning. *Again, it's all in the facts behind the case. *For instance,
it's not unheard of, in "at will" states, for someone to be fired without
cause. *It's also not uncommon for people to be fired for incompetence (after
clearly having been evidenced by the fact that they were in the job). *Both
are eligible for UI. *Basically, if someone is fired, or resigns, for reasons
beyond their control, they *are* eligible for UI.

Here is a site that has some discussion of this:http://www.helium.com/items/313125-c...surance...Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of course the problem there is that nothing there says that
it's common for someone who quits or is fired for cause to qualify for
and receive unemployment. *Does it happen, sure if you can prove some
extenuating circumstances.

If you read it, it's clearly *not* extenuating circumstances. If the employee
is not at fault, UI is payable. It really is that simple.

Read what? It isn't that simple.

Good grief. Read. The law states that UI is payable as long as the employee
is not at fault in the termination. Yes, it really is that simple.

If an employee quits just because he
just doesn't feel like working any more, he isn't at fault.

You're being an idiot. Of course it's his fault.

And in
the vast majority of cases, he isn't going to collect unemployment
because it was his choice to quit.

You are an idiot.

Now can the employee come up with some BS story, about
sexual harrassment, unsafe work conditions, the employer
firing him as opposed to him just quiting, etc and get some
review board somewhere to let him collect? Sure. But it
isn't typical. Which was Ed's point that in the cases he
was involved in, he never saw it happen.

Please. Stick with the point at hand.


But you're claiming that Ed's experience
where no one that quit at his company ever received unemployment
insurance, is irrelevant or unusual. * I say it's not unusual.

No, I'm saying that his experience is irrelevant. *The facts differ.- Hide quoted text -


I see, but of course if it were YOUR experience, then it would
be directly relevant, right?

The fact that my experience proves him wrong, yes.

Is there a point to your argument, other than to argue? Grow up!

On Sep 7, 12:27Â*am, "
wrote:

Of course the problem there is that nothing there says that
it's common for someone who quits or is fired for cause to qualify for
and receive unemployment. Â*Does it happen, sure if you can prove some
extenuating circumstances.

If you read it, it's clearly *not* extenuating circumstances. If the employee
is not at fault, UI is payable. It really is that simple.

Read what? It isn't that simple.

Good grief. Â*Read. Â*The law states that UI is payable as long as the employee
is not at fault in the termination. Â*Yes, it really is that simple.

You keep trying to mix together being FIRED and QUITTING.
They are two very different things.
Ed started the controversy here about under what conditions
you can receive UI if you QUIT. His point was that if you just
quit your job, except in limited circumstances, you are NOT
elligible for UE.
Your own link, which you choose not to quote here, says this:

"2. Job separation. As stated above, unemployment benefits are meant
for those workers who lost their job through no fault of their own.
Some examples would include being permanently laid off, having to move
with a spouse who is in the military, and being fired for reasons
other than misconduct."

No tell us how someone who quits there job simply because they
don't feel like working any more fits that description. Or show us
anything there that says that when an employee quits because they
don't like their job, they are elligible. It isn't there.




If an employee quits just because he
just doesn't feel like working any more, he isn't at fault.

You're being an idiot. Â*Of course it's his fault.

Well, then clealy that person does not meet the
qualification for receiving unemployment. Make up your mind.
I was just trying to
figure out how you may be trying to interpret this.
And here you go yet again, with the name calling.
Let's review again, where this started:


Ed:
"In most states you don't have to decide. You quite, no
benefits.

KRW:
Not true. It depends on the circumstances.


Ed:
"Very limited circumstances. Not if you quit because you don't wish
to
work any more. I've gone to many unemployment hearings in two
different states No
one that has ever quit from the company ever got benefits. Nor has
anyone that was fired since it is always with cause and proven. "


Now, what Ed has stated is the truth. You then proceeded to get
nasty
and claim Ed's personal experiences are irrelevant. Now, you're
attacking
me by calling me an idiot. What Ed has stated after he clarified it
is true.
Instead of accepting it, or explaining the specifics of your new
disagreement,
you attack him. That's also something we never
see from you, ie clarifying what you meant, or admitting you made a
mistake.

Let's see what some states say about their UE requirements:

From the state of NY:

You may be eligible for benefits if: .
€¢You lost your job due to lack of work
€¢The temporary or seasonal employment ended
€¢Your job was eliminated
€¢There was an involuntary reduction in force
€¢The company downsized or shut down
€¢The company restructured or reorganized
€¢There was a lack of company operating funds/orders
€¢You were out of work for any other business reason that you did not
choose or control
€¢Your employer discharged or fired you because you could not meet
their performance or production standards, or their qualifications for
the job

You may be denied benefits if you: .
€¢Were fired because you violated a company policy, rule or procedure,
such as absenteeism or insubordination
€¢Quit your job without good cause, such as a compelling personal
reason
€¢Are out of work because of a work stoppage (except for lockouts) in
the last 49 days that violated an existing collective bargaining
agreement where you worked



From the state of Ohio:

If he/she quit, may the applicant be eligible for benefits?

An applicant's unemployment must not be his/her fault. If the
applicant quits a job while the option of remaining employed exists,
he/she causes the unemployment. To establish eligibility, the
applicant must show that he/she had "just cause" for leaving the job.


Examples of "just cause" may include such reasons as:

–*The worker's health was endangered or he/she was physically unable
to do the work. The worker notified the employer with a medical
statement before quitting and gave the employer reasonable time to
find other suitable work for him/her.
–*The employer refused to meet conditions of the hiring agreement,
such as hours or wages.
–*The employer refused to provide legally required safety equipment or
measures.
–*The employer required the worker to perform work that violated
accepted moral or legal standards.
–*The applicant must provide information showing that he/she had "just
cause" for quitting the employment.

What are the situations where you MIGHT still be able to get
unemployment if you quit your job?

1.You might still be able to get unemployment if you quit your job
because of a hostile working environment.
2.You might still be able to get unemployment if you quit your job
because your job reduces your hours and/or your pay significantly.
3.You might still be able to get unemployment if you quit your job
because of medical conditions or disability.
4.You might still be able to get unemployment if you quit your job
because you were promised a better job, and you subsequently did not
get that other job -- this one is a real longshot.
5.You might still be able to get unemployment if you quit your job
because you quit your job to relocate and were unable to find a new
job -- this one is a real longshot.



Now all of that is consistent with what Ed said. It's consistent with
what
I have said. It's consistent with what your own link says. And that
is that
if you just quit your job, except in very limited circumstances, you
are NOT
eligible for unemployment benefits.

Everyone can see how this started. Ed stated that if you quit
you aren't eligible for UE. You pointed out that it depends on the
circumstance. Ed then even agreed with you and said that it's
very limited circumstances. Then, in your typical fashion, instead
of accepting when someone clarifies what they meant, you proceed
to attack them. Now, you're attacking me by calling me an idiot.




And in
the vast majority of cases, he isn't going to collect unemployment
because it was his choice to quit.

You are an idiot.

Nice, real nice.




Now can the employee come up with some BS story, about
sexual harrassment, unsafe work conditions, the employer
firing him as opposed to him just quiting, etc and get some
review board somewhere to let him collect? Â* Sure. Â*But it
isn't typical. Â*Which was Ed's point that in the cases he
was involved in, he never saw it happen.

Please. Â*Stick with the point at hand.

The point is that if you just quit your job, absent a compelling
reason, you do not qualify for UE. And consequently the vast
majority of those that quit their job do not receive UE.




But you're claiming that Ed's experience
where no one that quit at his company ever received unemployment
insurance, is irrelevant or unusual. Â* I say it's not unusual.

No, I'm saying that his experience is irrelevant. Â*The facts differ.- Hide quoted text -

I see, but of course if it were YOUR experience, then it would
be directly relevant, right?

The fact that my experience proves him wrong, yes.

Here's a novel idea. Instead of attacking Ed, instead of attacking
me,
why don't you try explaining the cases you have direct knowledge of
and under what circumstances and employee that just quits received
UE. That might convince someone. Calling people idiots will not.



Is there a point to your argument, other than to argue? Â*Grow up!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Typical. It's this kind of attitude that has resulted in me losing
respect for you some time ago. My point is that I'm fed up with
your mean, nasty attitude towards me and others here and I'm
for one am not going to put up with it. Ed is a regular, long time
poster who I respect. You're just a nasty, arrogant, divisive person.
And that's not meant as a name calling attack,
it's just an observation of your behavior here, as illustrated above.

It's also interesting that you act as if I'm the only one arguing
the point. Ed argues it. You've made far more posts on this
subject than either Ed or me. Regarding growing up, time to look
in the mirror.

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 04:42:54 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Sep 7, 12:27*am, "
wrote:

Of course the problem there is that nothing there says that
it's common for someone who quits or is fired for cause to qualify for
and receive unemployment. *Does it happen, sure if you can prove some
extenuating circumstances.

If you read it, it's clearly *not* extenuating circumstances. If the employee
is not at fault, UI is payable. It really is that simple.

Read what? It isn't that simple.

Good grief. *Read. *The law states that UI is payable as long as the employee
is not at fault in the termination. *Yes, it really is that simple.

You keep trying to mix together being FIRED and QUITTING.

No, I certainly am not. You aren't hearing *reason for*. Either
(being fired and quitting) *may* be eligible for UI, depending on the
reasons behind it. If the employee is not at fault (meaning the
reasons are beyond his control), the MAY STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR UI. Got
it?

They are two very different things.
Ed started the controversy here about under what conditions
you can receive UI if you QUIT. His point was that if you just
quit your job, except in limited circumstances, you are NOT
elligible for UE.

No, that is *NOT* what the issue is about. He stated, only backed up
by his very limited experience, that you could *not* get UI if you
were fired or quit. This is simply not true.

Your own link, which you choose not to quote here, says this:

Idiot. I linked it. I expected you to read it if you were interested
in the thread.

"2. Job separation. As stated above, unemployment benefits are meant
for those workers who lost their job through no fault of their own.

*EXACTLY* That's what I've been saying. Now I'm sure you'll try to
put words in my mouth. It is your MO.

Some examples would include being permanently laid off, having to move
with a spouse who is in the military, and being fired for reasons
other han misconduct."

Precisely what I've been saying, moron.

No tell us how someone who quits there job simply because they
don't feel like working any more fits that description. Or show us
anything there that says that when an employee quits because they
don't like their job, they are elligible. It isn't there.

*I* didn't say that. *YOU* did, moron! I was right. You're trying
to put words in my mouth.


If an employee quits just because he
just doesn't feel like working any more, he isn't at fault.

You're being an idiot. *Of course it's his fault.

Well, then clealy that person does not meet the
qualification for receiving unemployment. Make up your mind.
I was just trying to
figure out how you may be trying to interpret this.
And here you go yet again, with the name calling.
Let's review again, where this started:

Let's not and leave it with you being a moron.

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:51:35 -0400, z wrote:




No, I certainly am not. You aren't hearing *reason for*. Either
(being fired and quitting) *may* be eligible for UI, depending on the
reasons behind it. If the employee is not at fault (meaning the
reasons are beyond his control), the MAY STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR UI. Got
it?

They are two very different things.
Ed started the controversy here about under what conditions
you can receive UI if you QUIT. His point was that if you just
quit your job, except in limited circumstances, you are NOT
elligible for UE.

No, that is *NOT* what the issue is about. He stated, only backed up
by his very limited experience, that you could *not* get UI if you
were fired or quit. This is simply not true.



Well, at least one of the two of you read what I wrote.

From my 9/3 post:
Very limited circumstances. Not if you quit because you don't wish to
work any more.

I've gone to many unemployment hearings in two different states No
one that has ever quit from the company ever got benefits. Nor has
anyone that was fired since it is always with cause and proven.

On Sep 7, 11:40*pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:51:35 -0400, wrote:

No, I certainly am not. *You aren't hearing *reason for*. *Either
(being fired and quitting) **may* be eligible for UI, depending on the
reasons behind it. *If the employee is not at fault (meaning the
reasons are beyond his control), the MAY STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR UI. Got
it?

They are two very different things.
Ed started the controversy here about under what conditions
you can receive UI if you QUIT. *His point was that if you just
quit your job, except in limited circumstances, you are NOT
elligible for UE.

No, that is *NOT* what the issue is about. *He stated, only backed up
by his very limited experience, that you could *not* get UI if you
were fired or quit. *This is simply not true.

Well, at least one of the two of you read what I wrote.

From my 9/3 post:
Very limited circumstances. Not if you quit because you don't wish to
work any more.

That's the problem with krw. He can't take yes for an answer.
First you said that a person who quits can't collect unemployment
insurance. That is true in the vast majority of cases. krw, objected
and you quickly clarified it, saying you meant that they can't collect
except in very limited circumstances and not if they just don't wish
to work any more. That is consistent with my
experience. It's consistent with your experience.
It's also consistent with the links provided to NY and CT state
unemployment and krw's own link.

Yet instead of accepting your clarification, or perhaps discussing
what exceptions he believes people are using, he continues arguing
as if you never made the clarification, with short replies of
a few words and then starts attacking me and calling me an idiot
and moron for agreeing with you.
Sadly, it's not unusual behavior for him. I wonder if he treats those
he deals with in person the same way?




I've gone to many unemployment hearings in two different states *No
one that has ever quit from the company ever got benefits. *Nor has
anyone that was fired since it is always with cause and proven. *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But Ed, hasn't krw told you that your experience is irrelevant? Now
krw's experience, that of course is relevant. Funny thing though,
rather than tell us exactly what that experience is, he's hurling
insults.

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 23:40:45 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:51:35 -0400, z wrote:




No, I certainly am not. You aren't hearing *reason for*. Either
(being fired and quitting) *may* be eligible for UI, depending on the
reasons behind it. If the employee is not at fault (meaning the
reasons are beyond his control), the MAY STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR UI. Got
it?

They are two very different things.
Ed started the controversy here about under what conditions
you can receive UI if you QUIT. His point was that if you just
quit your job, except in limited circumstances, you are NOT
elligible for UE.

No, that is *NOT* what the issue is about. He stated, only backed up
by his very limited experience, that you could *not* get UI if you
were fired or quit. This is simply not true.



Well, at least one of the two of you read what I wrote.

From my 9/3 post:
Very limited circumstances.

It is *not* a "very limited circumstance". It happens quite often.

Not if you quit because you don't wish to work any more.

You're lying5 now. I never stated any such thing.

I've gone to many unemployment hearings in two different states No
one that has ever quit from the company ever got benefits. Nor has
anyone that was fired since it is always with cause and proven.

In you *very* limited experience, perhaps.