Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

she did not pay into the unemployment fund, I did. And as someone else has already pointed out, unemployment benefits are for people that lose their job due to no fault of their own. In this case she decided she didn't want the job anymore but also wants paid maternity leave and is using the unemployment system to try and get it.

You took money from her salary that she earned to pay for uif.
she did not quit to have a baby. She had it while being employed. Now she needs full time employment, and if you are not able to provide that, she is unemployed
this is not paid maternity leave. Maternity leave is when you come back to your place of employment after baby.
the baby is here already.
look the rules with dept of labor. It is their system

Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

Right, it was not full time employment. The employer did not have a full time job to offer. She had a part time job to offer. The nanny took the available job. Now, the nanny wants a job that doesn't exist. An employer does not have to create a full time job simply because an employee wants it.

If the employee wants a full time job and one is not available at her place of employment, she is welcome to leave and seek other opportunities.

Since she chose to leave, and is not laid off and there is a job she could take at her place of employment, she should not receive unemployment. Unemployment is not for people who decide to seek a new or better opportunity. It is to protect people from being let go when they are willing and able to work in their contracted job.

I can't decide if this is a TP. Obviously, unemployment benefits would not be approved in this case. What is your real question? Why are you here posting?

God knows an "unearned" paid maternity leave would be the worst thing ever.

Seriously OP, if she's playing the system she won't get anything (rightfully), but what is your deal with resenting the very IDEA a woman in America gets a paid maternity leave she didn't "pay into"? You sound unhinged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

she did not pay into the unemployment fund, I did. And as someone else has already pointed out, unemployment benefits are for people that lose their job due to no fault of their own. In this case she decided she didn't want the job anymore but also wants paid maternity leave and is using the unemployment system to try and get it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

Because she had a part time job to begin with. You are eligible for unemployment if your full time job is reduced to part time, but not because you currently have a part time job and want to switch to full time.

Anonymous wrote:Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

But it was not full time employment.
If you do not have full time employment you are unemployed.
she paid into the unemployment fund. You are unable to give her full time employment.
Why can she not get it?

Anonymous wrote:She is working the system a little bit, but why do you want her leave to be unpaid? She is obviously struggling (no new mom makes the decision to go from PT to FT just for kicks), and I highly doubt you offered short term disability as a benefit for her to even pay into. Mothers should be lifting up fellow mothers, not looking for ways to tear them down. In fighting among women is why we will never have true equality among, and why balancing work with motherhood will always be such a freaking struggle.

The nanny turned down PT work. The unemployment board looks down on anyone turning down a job regardless if it's seasonal, pt or ft.
OP she's playing the system. she'll prob get a nanny job under the table and collect unemployment at the same time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP Here - I should add that the letter I received stated that I have to attend a call with Nanny and the employment commission in about a week so they can get both sides of the story or whatever. So I suppose I will find out what's going to happen then but I'm wondering if anyone else has gone through this and how it turned out.

TIA.

I think that you're trolling. This is not how unemployment works, unless you are fighting her claim.

Of course I'm fighting her claim, her claim is BS!

I've done these calls OP. Write out your points and your proof in order of importance. Read your letter they sent thoroughly - it may say to fax or email any documents you want to submit as evidence by a certain date. Don't blow that deadline.

Unemployment is for people who are laid off or whose employment ends through no fault of their own.

Unemployment is not for people who decide to quit.

You offered her to continue with the job you had to offer. She didn't want that. She chose to move on and you should not have to pay a penny for that decision.

No unemployment eligibility if you are not paid on the books, but consequences equally bad for nanny in that case anyway (unreported income/unpaid taxes) so presumably she wouldn't have filed a claim if this wasn't on the books.

What happens to OP if she wasn't paying Nanny on the books?

OP, just take the call and tell the truth. I'd be surprised if they approve the claim based on the info you've provided, but that's the state's job to sort out.

I actually looked into this for a similar situation when I left my last job (MB here). I'd been PT since my first child was born and made a formal request to go back to FT, which my company declined, so I resigned, because I needed a FT position. So while it was a voluntary departure, they had refused to offer me my FT position back following my first child's birth, and I wasn't sure that was technically legal. (It's in a gray area, as I learned, because so much time had passed--I could have challenged it immediately after leave but waited too long.) But I wasn't eligible for unemployment in that situation, either, because I had left of my own volition. Seems like that's basically the situation here, although it sounds like your nanny was never FT to begin with, which changes it a bit. (She'd be entitled to go back FT after leave if she had been FT before leave, but it sounds like she was not.)

At any rate, in our state the department that handles unemployment benefits assesses the individual circumstances and determines when a claim is warranted. Just let them do their job and you'll be fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I don't know VA employment law but just be honest and direct about the circumstances of her leaving. Do not lie on her behalf.

If VA only provides unemployment for individuals that terminated through no fault of their own (lay off for example) then she is likely falsifying her report and attempting fraud. I would not lie to a government agency and play along with this. If VA offers unemployment for individuals that quit then she should be fine.

I would never lie on her behalf, to the contrary, I hope she gets nothing. I just want to know if this is what the system allows people to do.

Really? You hope she gets NOTHING?

Take a page from the previous MB poster and answer questions honestly but leave your attitude out of it. Let the system do its job.

Unbelievable.

Your nanny is definitely trying to work the system. First off, I'm assuming that everything is above board and you've been paying payroll taxes, etc. Those taxes fund unemployment benefits. The problem with just going along with her claim is that your payroll taxes will likely increase in the future if here claim is approved. A portion of your payroll taxes is calculated based on previous employees use of the unemployment benefit program.