Laserfiche WebLink
- M M <br />Director Price made the following presentation: <br />To: John Tippin <br />County Commissioner <br />Date: November 23, 1993 <br />Through: James Chandler,-�� <br />County Administ ator <br />From: Jack Pricee",_ Sub: Unemployment Compensation <br />Chapter 443 of the state statutes, Unemployment Compensation, is <br />pro -claimant to the extent that effective employer cost control is <br />difficult. Some of the more troublesome provisions for employers <br />are noted below. <br />443.036 Definitions <br />(5) Base Period <br />This period places an employer in jeopardy of being charged for <br />benefits as long as 17 months after an employee leaves a position <br />regardless of the conditions under which the separation occurred. <br />443.101 Disqualification for benefits <br />(1)(a) 1. Disqualification for voluntarily quitting is <br />ineffective if the employee becomes reemployed and then leaves that <br />position under non -disqualifying conditions. <br />(1)(c) (2) The state is obligated to insure that the <br />claimant seeks and accepts suitable employment. Failure to do so <br />will result in disqualification for unemployment benefits. The <br />state has not been diligent in verifying the actions are being <br />taken. Consequently claimants who should be disqualified for not <br />seeking or accepting suitable employment, are receiving benefits. <br />0 <br />443.151 Procedure concerning claims <br />(4)(c) Review by commission <br />This appeal step is historically a "rubber stamp" endorsement of <br />the Appeals Referees' decisions. If the referees are so completely <br />correct, the appeal step to the commission should be eliminated. <br />Otherwise an employer appeal to the commission is an exercise which <br />is costly and nonproductive. <br />(6) Recovery and Recoupment <br />This section obligates the state to seek recovery of benefits paid <br />to a claimant who was first determined eligible for benefits but <br />subsequently, perhaps as a result of an employer appeal, is <br />redetermined to be ineligible. The state appears not to be <br />diligent in pursuing this money and if it should be recovered the <br />process for returning it to the "reimbursable" employer is not <br />clear if it exists at all. <br />Thanks for the opportunity to comment. <br />Chairman Bird asked if there is any way to avoid paying <br />benefits to employees who leave voluntarily. <br />County Attorney Vitunac responded that the County should <br />contact the Florida Association of Counties to try to get a state- <br />wide initiative to protect counties from this procedure. <br />47 <br />BOOK 91 Fnur-. j <br />NUV2�1993 <br />