Someone help a fellow trucker out.

Heard quality out of Indy was ok you know they in the business to make money but a least truck repairs on them another one is Carmichael in Chicago dont think either move freight just lease trucks

 

They only have to provide information, if they challenge the unemployment insurance claim. File anyway; if they don't challenge your claim, then at least you get some temporary money.

They can simply choose not to respond to the unemployment insurance office. Usually, after around 30 days, the claim gets processed as a summary judgment in favor of the employee. Most employers don't really care enough to fight claims, since they don't actually pay the benefits, anyway - the unemployment insurance carrier does, and since that's usually a state agency, claims typically don't even affect the employer's premiums. They have to either really hate you, or be serious a-holes, to go to the trouble of fighting you for unemployment insurance...

 

This is inaccurate assessment of the unemployment system. Any benefit payment does effect the premium paid by the company.

 

There is some truth to this, I have found, after some research. Here is where I got the information that I started with:
http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/uitaxtopic.asp

"The FUTA tax rate for employers in states not subject to a FUTA credit reduction is generally 0.6% (6.0% - 5.4%), for a maximum FUTA tax of $42.00 per employee, per year (.006 X $7, 000 = $42.00)."

And here is what I had missed:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/state-unemployment-tax-rates-2008-2014

Each state does have a minimum and maximum unemployment insurance tax, and some make rate determinations based upon the behavior of the employer, industry, or the employer tax base as a whole. It appears, from this, that an employer has more at stake if you were employed by them for a longer period, if they paid you a higher wage, and/or if they have a high ratio of claims to wages paid (very simplisticly meaning that they have a low rate of retention). Beyond a certain point, they hit the maximum tax, and it no longer matters, and below a certain point, the minimum tax applies, and again, claims do not affect their tax rate; but within the range, yes, the state tax rate is variable. Not necessarily by specific employer, but claims may have some effect on the employer's unemployment insurance tax rate. Hardly enough to fight over, unless it happens a lot, but there it is...

 

OH so you had the truck, so yeah they fired you because the truck is an asset that needs to make money, not sit at someone's house.

It seems they were not going to delve into your personal stuff, too many people make up crap so it isn't personal, it is their business to run the truck to make money. Reapply if you can, it isn't personal.

 

This is happening to us currently. The company is appealing the decision that the unemployment made. Would it be best to just to use our lawyer for this? The appeal will be a phone call with a judge and both parties on the line. The reason they are fighting this is retaliation IMO, the company used the word "incompetent" for the reason they are fighting the unemployment. That is a pretty harsh word to use.

 

As a rule, the cost of bringing a lawyer into an unemployment insurance hearing is not proportional to the money that is at stake - not for the employee. The company often has one on retainer, on their payroll, or on their corporate board, so they are typically paying their attorney whether he/she does anything or not, so unless they actually have lots of other work to do, their attorney will likely be involved. That involvement may be direct, or it may consist of consultation/preparation for whoever is representing the company at the hearing.

Everyone involved knows this. The employer, the "judge" (who may or may not actually be called that - "arbiter" is a common substitute); they know that the employer is in the driver's seat. As a rule, insurance is looking for ways not to pay, in order to be profitable and keep premiums down, but state-run insurance doesn't really answer to policyholders or shareholders; it answers to politicians and claimants, so it is somewhat more liberal.

You're right; "incompetent" is strong wording. Since they used it, it is up to them to support that statement - it is not your responsibility to disprove it. You may want to dispute it, since it's a hard thing for them to prove, but it's not on you to prove your competence. They hired you, so clearly, at some point, they thought that you were competent. If you worked there for a long time, then that tends to support your competence, unless they were also incompetent as your employer. Most likely, they will argue that your competence changed, at some point, and the change is the reason for your dismissal. There will likely be some incident, or series of events, which will have led to this downgrade their evaluation of your competence, and they will likely point to these events. Usually, a good defense against this is to ask for documentation describing whether and how the employer counseled you about these events, before terminating you. Now, if you wrecked your truck, they can probably just claim "safety", and it's pretty open-and-shut; you're boned. But if they didn't like your on-time delivery percentage, or something like that, then you can probably throw "safety" back in their faces, and cite the FMCSRs, with statement like "fatigue", since they aren't allowed to force a fatigued driver to drive. Also, if they have no record of counseling you about being late, then they can't very well complain about a problem that they elected not to tell you about.

A lot depends upon what exactly happened, to make then call you "incompetent". But it is a strong statement, which they will most likely have to support, at the hearing. An attorney probably wouldn't hurt, if winning is more important to you than money - but if the money is the reason that you are fighting, then weigh carefully the costs, against the potential gain. Some states will award attorney's fees, but usually only in a civil lawsuit - not in an unemployment insurance benefits determination hearing. If you do consult an attorney, it's worth asking whether his fees will be paid by you, or the employer, and under what circumstances.

 

Thank you for taking the time to reply. It is literally for an amount of less than $250. So it is not about the money at this point. I am just amazed that a billion dollar company would do this. And yes, it is personal now, when using the word "incompetent" to describe work ethics and abilities. And yes, the company was not efficient as they should have been. So maybe both at fault on some level. Its a shame though that not only was I out of work for over a month, but I received only one week of pay through unemployment and they are appealing it. Shame on them! it did not just affect me, but my family too, just trying to survive to pay the mortgage.