California’s Employment Development Department, or “the EDD”, issued twenty billion dollars in fraudulent unemployment benefits during California’s early COVID-era lockdowns. Unemployment benefits were automatically and mindlessly doled out to tens of thousands of people who were plainly not qualified to receive them, even under generously written and applicant-friendly rules.
In an apparent face-saving measure, Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly campaigned on trying to claw back the benefits that should never have been issued in the first place. In reality, the EDD’s “claw back” campaign means that now workers who clearly and readily qualify for unemployment benefits are being categorically denied benefits. Indeed, employees who were granted benefits years ago by the EDD are now being retroactively targeted by the EDD. While it was once rare for employees to need help navigating a once employee-friendly system, employees are now needing legal help with unemployment benefits at an unprecedented rate.
This article discusses some of the more common excuses the EDD will assert when trying to claw-back your unemployment benefits.
First, the EDD will assert that the employee is disqualified from obtaining unemployment benefits for making a false statement to the EDD. (Unemployment Insurance Code § 1257 (a).) The law rightfully forbids applicants for unemployment insurance from lying in order to obtain them, legally called making a “willful” false statement or representation. However, the EDD will often confuse, perhaps intentionally, the existence of conflicting or confusing facts or versions of events with the employee lying and use this as a justification to deny benefits. This often arises over the reasons and circumstances of the employee’s termination, including whether they were fired for “misconduct” or when the employee’s last day of employment was. Employers and employees often have a good faith dispute about these issues, but again, this does not mean one party is willfully lying. Worse yet, the EDD will often fail to state in their underlying Notice of Determination what they even contend the employee is wilfully lying about.
Second, the EDD will claim that the employee is “medically unable to work”. This often arises if the employee suffered from some health condition while employed and/or that the employee’s health factored into the employer’s decision to not accommodate or terminate the employee. Legally speaking, the EDD requires that an applicant for unemployment benefits to actually, “able to work and available to work”. (Unemployment Insurance Code § 1253 (c).) While theoretically some employees may be so injured or unhealthy that they can perform no work whatsoever, the law requires that employees be provided with reasonable accommodations. Only if no reasonable accommodations exist may an employee be lawfully fired because of their medical condition or disability. Moreover, just because the employer claims that no accommodations exist does not mean that the employee can be denied benefits. Unfortunately, the EDD is often ignorant of the employer’s duty to provide reasonable accommodations and/or will blindly defer to the employer’s version of events and as a result deem the employee unqualified for benefits.
Third, the EDD will often seek to deny benefits by claiming that the employee quit or resigned from his or her employment. The law disqualifies employees who quit or resign, without good cause, from obtaining unemployment insurance benefits. (Unemployment Insurance Code § 1256.) However, employers will frequently mischaracterize a termination or lay off as a resignation or as the employee “quitting” simply to frustrate the employee’s ability to get benefits. The EDD, who are now incentivized to deny and claw back benefits, will often blindly defer to these characterizations.
Employees should be extremely cautious when dealing with a politically-charged EDD. The employee should carefully monitor all correspondence from the EDD so that he or she can promptly and timely appeal any denials of benefits. Appeals must be promptly initiated. Are you experiencing challenges in obtaining unemployment insurance benefits? Contact the Law Office of Brian Mathias today.