Brushing Up On Unemployment Benefits Pitfalls

We’ve received a lot of calls lately from folks having trouble with their unemployment benefits claims. The issue’s usually that Iowa Workforce Development has denied a claim. Lately, that denial’s frequently coupled with IWD’s demand that the person repay any benefits that have already been received. We’re seeing a few common problems and misunderstandings that are leading people to that point and wanted to clear them up.

IOWA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CAN REVIEW AND REVOKE A RECIPENT’S BENEFITS AT ANY TIME

The majority of our calls are from people who were initially approved for unemployment benefits earlier this year. They may even have been receiving benefits. Then IWD notifies the person that it’s reviewing that person’s benefits eligibility. If IWD decides that that person wasn’t in fact eligible for benefits, the benefits will stop. IWD may even demand that the person repay any benefits received to that point.

Nothing prevents IWD from proceeding in this manner. This is happening a lot because IWD rapidly processed and approved claims this past spring without necessarily doing the full preliminary eligibility review that it would have normally done. But now IWD is going back to review those earlier claim. People who voluntarily separated from employment this past spring are finding themselves to be particularly vulnerable to an IWD reversal and overpayment demand. That leads to the next topic.

CORONAVIRUS-RELATED VOLUNTARY SEPARATIONS DON’T AUTOMATICALLY CREATE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS ELIGIBILITY

Many of the people getting snared in the review process described above are learning that it’s difficult to establish benefits eligibility after a voluntary separation from employment, even during a pandemic and for reasons related to a pandemic. Someone who voluntarily separates because of coronavirus-related concerns needs to demonstrate more than that he or she was afraid of the virus and wanted to stay home or unemployment benefits will likely be denied. Evidence might be needed of the employee’s medical condition or that of someone who lives with them, a lack of virus precautions at the workplace, or of suspected coronavirus cases in the workplace.

YOU ALWAYS NEED TO PROVIDE YOUR TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR THE TELEPHONE APPEAL HEARING

This is tripping up a lot of people. They give their telephone number for the initial factfinding interview. They lose. They appeal. They assume that Iowa Workforce Development’s Appeals Bureau already has their number, so they don’t provide it again. They never receive a call for the scheduled appeal hearing. That’s when they find out that they had to separately supply their telephone number to the IWD Appeals Bureau and have forfeited their right to participate in the appeal hearing and present evidence in support of their benefits claim. Unemployment benefits are almost always denied when a claimant fails to provide a telephone number for the appeal hearing and doesn’t participate in it.

WAITING UNTIL YOU LOSE THE TELEPHONE APPEAL HEARING IS THE WRONG TIME TO HIRE A LAWYER

Your best chance of presenting your evidence to support your benefits eligibility and of winning your case is at the first-level appeal, which is an appeal hearing conducted by an administrative law judge, usually by telephone. That’s also the best time for a lawyer to help you with your claim. Any further appeals after the first-level appeal hearing will very likely be limited to the evidence presented during that hearing. You almost never get to add to your evidence after the first appeal hearing. If you wait until after the first appeal hearing to hire a lawyer, not only is the lawyer now fighting against a standard that generally requires that the administrative law judge’s decision be upheld, but the lawyer has no opportunity to influence the evidence presented in support of your benefits claim. Instead, the lawyer is stuck working with whatever evidence you submitted during the appeal hearing, evidence that’s already been deemed insufficient by at least one judge. Consider hiring a lawyer for the first-level ALJ appeal hearing if you consider hiring one at all.