Agreement Not To Contest Unemployment

As noted above, there may be circumstances in which the company decides not to challenge a right, even if it has sufficient reasons to do so. In the end, an employer should only challenge a entitlement to benefits if it has sufficient grounds that could result in disqualification. Layoffs for poor performance, the inability to learn new procedures or operate new equipment, and similar reasons for terminating staff are not a basis for challenging the granting of benefits. Only these cases, where serious faults have occurred, are good candidates for a successful challenge. As with all other legal matters, they require a lot of time and attention to detail. The reasons for denying benefits must be clear and convincing. In addition to a clear presentation detailing the basis of dismissal, all existing rules should be violated, oral warnings must be documented and all written warnings to the competition must be attached. The natural tendency of most public employment offices is to reduce the provision of benefits. They often believe that the state-run fund is specifically designed to meet the needs of the unemployed. It is considered part of the social safety net designed to protect those in need.

They tend to ignore the fact that the former employee was only put out of work because of his own gross misconduct. The goal of almost all employers is to maximize profits by reducing operating costs whenever possible. The cost of excessive unemployment is a particular concern for most employers. To question any request for unemployment therefore seems to be a good business decision. It can have a significant impact on the tax rate that the employer must pay to fund unemployment insurance. The less successful the employer has been in claiming, the lower the tax rate. However, the best strategy is not to challenge all claims. There may be good reasons not to dispute certain assertions. In addition, legislation in Kansas, Oklahoma and Washington contains provisions that deter an employer from challenging a decision on the right to unemployment benefit if the employer does not meet a right within a specified time frame.

Some staff and labour law experts advise that employers are carefully considering challenging claims for outstanding staff.