False "pay period" dates on a pay check... illegal?

[Preypacer]

I have a question here about something I hope I can get an answer (or three) about…

I’m awaiting an upcoming unemployment appeal. I won the initial claim (the adjudicator agreed that I was released from work without misconduct connected with the work) and my former employer is appealing it.

Here’s a run-down:
A family emergency had come up and I had to go out of state to help out. I explained this to my boss during a meeting and reassured him that it wouldn’t hinder my ability to do my job since I work online anyway. He didn’t decline or object or say no or anything like that. He said he would think about how he wanted to proceed… but that was the extent of it.

Two weeks later, after I had been here and working, I submitted my hours, via email, as usual (we were paid every two weeks) for the previous pay period. FYI: pay periods end on Wednesday, and we’re paid that Friday for that pay period; they don’t hold back a check for a week, etc.

My boss called me up a bit later that day and said they were looking over my hours and that they didn’t want to continue with me working out of state, but wanted to find someone locally. They paid me an extra week of vacation, above 1 week I’d requested to cover my travel time, etc, as well as 32 hours that I billed for the 2nd week of the pay period.

Well, I went ahead and filed for unemployment, since I had been let go. My former boss contested it, saying I quit voluntarily, that they would never let someone work out of state, etc. etc.

He also said something that I had suspected already… The last check he sent me was dated for the pay period previous to the one he was actually paying me for. This was obviously to support his claim that I’d quit voluntarily 2 weeks prior.

The thing is, I was already paid for that pay period two weeks before. I still have the pay stub and the post-marked envelope it was mailed to me in as proof - as well as the emails I sent with the hours for each pay period, both of which corroborate my side of the story and show his side to be very inconsistent.

On its face, it would look like he paid me twice for the same pay period… which of course wouldn’t happen, and didn’t happen.

Now here’s my question… Is what he did illegal? If not, is it at least shady enough that it could blow apart his case? I believe my case is solid enough on its own - I have 2 weeks worth of emails, phone records, a bank statement showing the date and amount of each check I was paid after I got here, etc. etc. But, there would be something very poetic in knowing that in his greed, my boss got stupid and blew it for himself.

If what I’m thinking is correct, then it wouldn’t surprise me that he doesn’t just cancel the appeal upon receiving the package with my evidence in it.

Would like to know, though, from someone who can say so definitively - or at least with a high degree of confidence - if my former boss has basically screwed himself by doing that?

Thanks for any answers.

[Preypacer]

In re-reading that post, I think I might have done a really poor job explaining the situation. If I did, let me know and I’ll try and explain it better.

[Markxxx]

When I worked in H/R, one of the companies I worked for made it a policy to dispute every claim no matter how valid.

You sound like you’re on solid ground especially if you got the evidence to back it up. State laws demand very accurate accounting of employees hours worked. However mistakes happen so they do allow leeway.

If called out your boss will simply claim it was an “honest error” in dating. Unless there is a pattern that your state wages and hours board can prove (they can only do this with a full audit), it’s unlikely they’d get fined for one time.

Is it enough to validate your claim? Hard to say as it’s up to the arbitrator. I could never figure those guys out. I’ve seen two, what I wouild call identical claims, and one arbitrator decides one way and one decides the other way.

In tough economic times though arbitrators tend to bend toward helping the employee.

[amarone]

I don’t know where you are, but I have some experience of Georgia law. First, you do not qualify for unemployment just becasue you were “let go.” If your company can prove that you were terminated for cause, they can successfully appeal the unemployment filing. However, to prove cause they will have to show that you have violated company policy or prove that you had been warned that you would lose your job unless you changed your behavior.

Was there written company policy stating that employees doing your job must be local or at least not out of state?

If not, were you ever warned (in writing, so they can prove it), that you would lose your job if you left the state?

If the answer to both of the above is “no”, you would get unemployment (in Georgia).

As for the duplicate pay periods, I don’t know the law on that. I would be a little concerned that your employer might claim that you were accidentally paid twice for the same period and therefore you owe them the money back. But your evidence does sound compelling.

As an aside, if you have moved to a state where your ex-employer does not currently have employees, I can have some sympathy for them not wanting an employee in that state. There is a lot more to it than the fact that you work online so it should be much the same. By having an employee in the state, they would now have to do a bunch of things, probably including:

• register for business in that state
• start filing state tax returns for that state, which at minimum increases accounting costs and may also increase the taxes paid
• pay unemployment insurance in that state
• possibly pay property taxes in that state
• having to start charging sales taxes to any customers in that state (if they sell taxable goods)
• research employment law in that state and update the employee handbook and policies accordingly
• possibly change health insurance to provide coverage in that state - if they have no other out-of-state employees, they may only have an in-state option.

[Preypacer]

@amarone

I don’t know where you are, but I have some experience of Georgia law. First, you do not qualify for unemployment just becasue you were “let go.” If your company can prove that you were terminated for cause, they can successfully appeal the unemployment filing. However, to prove cause they will have to show that you have violated company policy or prove that you had been warned that you would lose your job unless you changed your behavior.

Was there written company policy stating that employees doing your job must be local or at least not out of state?

If not, were you ever warned (in writing, so they can prove it), that you would lose your job if you left the state?

If the answer to both of the above is “no”, you would get unemployment (in Georgia).

As for the duplicate pay periods, I don’t know the law on that. I would be a little concerned that your employer might claim that you were accidentally paid twice for the same period and therefore you owe them the money back. But your evidence does sound compelling.

As an aside, if you have moved to a state where your ex-employer does not currently have employees, I can have some sympathy for them not wanting an employee in that state. There is a lot more to it than the fact that you work online so it should be much the same. By having an employee in the state, they would now have to do a bunch of things, probably including:

• register for business in that state
• start filing state tax returns for that state, which at minimum increases accounting costs and may also increase the taxes paid
• pay unemployment insurance in that state
• possibly pay property taxes in that state
• having to start charging sales taxes to any customers in that state (if they sell taxable goods)
• research employment law in that state and update the employee handbook and policies accordingly
• possibly change health insurance to provide coverage in that state - if they have no other out-of-state employees, they may only have an in-state option.

Actually, my claim came down to whether I was let go or quit voluntarily.

The adjudicator in the initial claim concluded that I was let go after I was already here, and that I was “discharged from employment without misconduct connected with the work”. In short, I was let go. Thus, I qualified for unemployment. My former employer is now appealing that decision.

Misconduct has never even entered into the discussion. In fact, on the records I received from the unemployment office containing all the statements from the initial claim, they noted that I had never received warnings or been suspended (which is true, I never had trouble in my time working there).

As for sympathizing with not wanting an employee working out of state… I could understand that, too… if they’d said so in the first place, when I first told them. They didn’t say that. They didn’t even say “no” or object to me working out of state. They’re using that as their “official reason” only now because unemployment is involved and they’re trying to squirm out of it.

That never came up, and I was out here working for 2 weeks before they let me go. It’s not like I was being “sneaky” about it… In the two weeks I was out here, I emailed my boss twice with updates, made several phone calls trying to contact him, and spoke on a few occasions to one of his salespeople who met and talked with him almost every day. I think it’s logical to assume that if he really didn’t want me working out of state, that something would have been said in response to those activities… like “Hey, why are you doing work? You’re not employed here anymore”. Also, he paid me for the 32 hours of work I did in that time - though he’s claiming it was for the previous pay period, which I already explained is bogus because I was already paid for that with a completely separate check.

As for accidentally being paid twice… no way they can claim that in any plausible way… not that they won’t try anyway (someone willing to falsify pay records like that will do anything I figure). I have two separate emails for each check, 2 weeks apart, with different hours. One has the straight 80 hours I’m paid for a typical pay period, the other has me requesting 1 week vacation pay and 32 hours of work billed. There’s no mistake here… they’re trying to pull a fast one and it’s clear to anyone I show the pay stubs, the hours, the emails, etc. to.

[Preypacer]

@Markxxx

When I worked in H/R, one of the companies I worked for made it a policy to dispute every claim no matter how valid.

You sound like you’re on solid ground especially if you got the evidence to back it up. State laws demand very accurate accounting of employees hours worked. However mistakes happen so they do allow leeway.

If called out your boss will simply claim it was an “honest error” in dating. Unless there is a pattern that your state wages and hours board can prove (they can only do this with a full audit), it’s unlikely they’d get fined for one time.

Well, the thing is, they stated in one of their statements to Unemployment that they paid me my last check for the previous pay period. For example, “we paid him on 10/15/09 for the pay period ending 10/1/09”. They can’t claim that’s a “mistake” after saying they did it deliberately in a statement to the adjudicator.

I have the emails I sent for each pay period printed out as evidence. Each is post-marked with the date/time (automatically by Google) that it was sent (both days being payroll day for their respective pay period).

@Markxxx

Is it enough to validate your claim? Hard to say as it’s up to the arbitrator. I could never figure those guys out. I’ve seen two, what I wouild call identical claims, and one arbitrator decides one way and one decides the other way.

In tough economic times though arbitrators tend to bend toward helping the employee.

Well, I’m hoping the evidence I send is compelling enough that my former boss just says “forget it” and becomes one of those that doesn’t bother to show up, or cancels it ahead of time.

[amarone]

@Preypacer

Actually, my claim came down to whether I was let go or quit voluntarily.

The adjudicator in the initial claim concluded that I was let go after I was already here, and that I was “discharged from employment without misconduct connected with the work”. In short, I was let go.

I think we are saying the same thing - certainly what the adjudicator said matches what I said. I suspect you are just ascribing a more specirfic meaning to “let go” than me. To me, it is merely a euphemism for “fired”, whether the person was fired for lack of work or cause. As a further aside, it is a horrible euphemism - it suggests that you have done someone a favor; you have generously given them permission to leave.

As for sympathizing with not wanting an employee working out of state… I could understand that, too… if they’d said so in the first place, when I first told them. They didn’t say that. They didn’t even say “no” or object to me working out of state. They’re using that as their “official reason” only now because unemployment is involved and they’re trying to squirm out of it.

I don’t have any sympathy for your specific employer - he’s a slimeball. I was just making a general point. We have “online employees” in several states and there is a burden created. But we have never fired anyone for moving state.

[Preypacer]

@amarone

I think we are saying the same thing - certainly what the adjudicator said matches what I said. I suspect you are just ascribing a more specirfic meaning to “let go” than me. To me, it is merely a euphemism for “fired”, whether the person was fired for lack of work or cause. As a further aside, it is a horrible euphemism - it suggests that you have done someone a favor; you have generously given them permission to leave.

I don’t have any sympathy for your specific employer - he’s a slimeball. I was just making a general point. We have “online employees” in several states and there is a burden created. But we have never fired anyone for moving state.

Ahhh I get ya.

Well, hopefully it all pans out. I have all my evidence ready, I just need to “package it up” with labels and such so I can easily refer to it during my testimony.

Will be interesting to see what my former boss sends as documented proof. Not sure how he can even have any, considering nothing was ever documented - there was nothing to document. But again, if he’s willing to put false pay period dates on paychecks… no telling what he’d be willing to do.

Really makes me wonder why they bother putting people under oath if so much dishonesty is so blatantly displayed and, it seems, no one’s ever called on it. In many cases, it seems, the employer lies through their teeth… and in some cases wins because of it, even without documentation or other substantial evidence to back it up.

That’s the only thing that has me nervous about this appeal… My case is solid, and I’ve done nothing that I’m trying to hide, but I have no clue what my employer would be willing to lie about in order to win.

[Translucent_Daydream]

I had a friend in Texas that went through something similar, and he won after it was all drawn out. The employer appealed to try to scare my friend out of getting his unemployment. The employer didn’t show up to the appeal.

[dracoi]

I don’t think the pay period dates on a check are all that important. From a tax perspective, states and the IRS are more concerned about the date of payment.

However, employers are required to keep accurate records of hours worked and of the date of termination. There are laws regarding overtime that will mandate 1.5x pay for any hours over 40 worked in a week. If they’re trying to say that the last check was from the previous pay period, then you could push the issue by asking for the overtime pay.

[Wheelz]

If I may hijack a bit for a related question – What’s in it for the former employer to contest unemployment eligibility? Doesn’t that money come from state funds? Or is the employer responsible for a portion of it?

[amarone]

@Wheelz

If I may hijack a bit for a related question – What’s in it for the former employer to contest unemployment eligibility? Doesn’t that money come from state funds? Or is the employer responsible for a portion of it?

The employer pays State Unemployment Insurance (SUI). The main factor in determining the amount is how many recent former employees have claimed unemployment.

[Preypacer]

@Wheelz

If I may hijack a bit for a related question – What’s in it for the former employer to contest unemployment eligibility? Doesn’t that money come from state funds? Or is the employer responsible for a portion of it?

Each employer pays a tax, usually quarterly as I understand. The tax is determined based on a % derived from a combination of salary amount and how many employees they have. That tax goes into a pool that all employers contribute to.

When an employee is let go and successfully receives unemployment, the employer’s account is charged and their tax % can increase as a result and, thus, they have to pay more money into the pool. So basically, they try to fight it in order to prevent the tax rate from increasing.

At least that’s my understanding of it.

[Preypacer]

@dracoi

I don’t think the pay period dates on a check are all that important. From a tax perspective, states and the IRS are more concerned about the date of payment.

However, employers are required to keep accurate records of hours worked and of the date of termination. There are laws regarding overtime that will mandate 1.5x pay for any hours over 40 worked in a week. If they’re trying to say that the last check was from the previous pay period, then you could push the issue by asking for the overtime pay.

I considered that angle as well.

I was looking at the situation and trying to think of how my old boss could try to explain/spin it. If he insisted that the pay was for the previous pay period, which was a full 80 hours in reality, then shouldn’t he have paid me Time and a half for the additional 32 hours?

Unless there’s an angle I didn’t consider, no matter how he tries to explain it (other than telling the truth, which he already has failed to do), it leaves a loose end that needs to be tied up. And considering all paperwork regarding employee pay and such has to be accurate, it’s not like he can just fudge some excuse off the top of his head and wing it… plus he doesn’t really think that fast in the first place.

But I think even all that could be dismissed and here’s why…

I sent an email on the payroll date of the first pay period, it was for 80 hours. Each day is indicated individually on its own line, with the date, and includes the start and finish time shown for each day, along with the total number of hours for the day. At the bottom is a total for the pay period. So, the pay period is accounted for, broken down by day, in the email itself; not to mention the date the email is sent which is added automatically by gmail.

The last check I received has a similar break-down of the pay period on a day-by-day basis. I entered ‘Vacation’ for each of the days I requested vacation pay for, and then the number of hours for the remaining days, equaling 32 hours worked and 40 hours vacation. I also have the request for the vacation pay (as a follow-up to a previous email I sent my boss asking if it would be okay for me to use a week of vacation pay)… The check I was given - which was the final one - shows 80 hours vacation (1 week I requested, plus 1 week I was given when I was let go) and the 32 hours I billed.

So… I mean… everything is corroborated… all the dots connect perfectly. So… thinking like a sane person, to me, the evidence would speak for itself and to try and argue otherwise would be folly. But then… I don’t know how logically my boss is willing to think; he might think “all that documentation don’t matter; we can still win this”.

[amarone]

@Preypacer

Each employer pays a tax, usually quarterly as I understand. The tax is determined based on a % derived from a combination of salary amount and how many employees they have. That tax goes into a pool that all employers contribute to.

When an employee is let go and successfully receives unemployment, the employer’s account is charged and their tax % can increase as a result and, thus, they have to pay more money into the pool. So basically, they try to fight it in order to prevent the tax rate from increasing.

At least that’s my understanding of it.

Spot on. The exact agorithms and amounts vary by state. We are a stable company with low turnover and the cost of SUI is negligible. We pay Georgia about $6,000 a year with a payroll between $2.5 and $3m. In comparison, California charges more than twice that rate.

I have only ever once appealed a case on behalf of my employer. I lost. Apart from that one, I fill in the forms in a way that I know will allow the person to claim. There again, we have never had to fire someone for gross misconduct - just for lack of performance or shortage of work. We could fire someone for poor performance in a way that would jeopardize their unemployment claim - principally ensuring we have written warnings that clearly state what the person must do to avoid losing their job, or else. But we don’t bother - taking a small hit on SUI costs is nothing to us, especially in comparison to the ex-employee’s position.

[Mama_Zappa]

@Preypacer

Each employer pays a tax, usually quarterly as I understand. The tax is determined based on a % derived from a combination of salary amount and how many employees they have. That tax goes into a pool that all employers contribute to.

When an employee is let go and successfully receives unemployment, the employer’s account is charged and their tax % can increase as a result and, thus, they have to pay more money into the pool. So basically, they try to fight it in order to prevent the tax rate from increasing.

At least that’s my understanding of it.

That’s it exactly. Your tax rate (which by the way is assessed only on the first few thousand in income, at least in my state) is based on a combination of things, including your company’s history of claims. We had a nanny for many years, and it varied every year even though we never had a claim - I think part of it is the number of overall claims from anyone in the state in the previous year. The year we did have a claim (let the nanny go), my rate jumped from something like .4% to .5%.

With a larger employer with more employees and more attempted claims, the rate might well quite a bit higher. Though a single claim shouldn’t affect it that badly, an employer might make a habit of contesting everything as a matter of principle (bastids!).

[G.Pie]

@amarone

The employer pays State Unemployment Insurance (SUI). The main factor in determining the amount is how many recent former employees have claimed unemployment.

In Canada, there is no downside for the employer. But I have heard of several cases where the employer did his/her best to make sure that the employee wasn’t eligible for insurance. I guess if someone leaves on bad terms their boss might just want to screw them over.

[Preypacer]

So, given the feedback I’ve gotten so far to my initial questions (which I appreciate all of by the way), I have a few more specific ones now…

The people who’ve worked in HR could probably answer this one directly, along with anyone who otherwise has a lot of experience…

Knowing that the burden of proof is on my former employer, and that they’re now appealing a decision already decided in my favor… What exactly does my employer have to provide to show, sufficiently, that I quit voluntarily and was not “let go”?

Is something in writing with my signature required? No such document exists in this case, so I’m curious if some other form of evidence, like verbal testimony, would be given equal weight as an actual document?

If they say something verbally, but I have something documented that shows it’s incorrect… is my documented evidence given more weight than their verbal testimony?

Sorry for all the questions. Never been through this before, and I really want to be as knowledgeable about it as possible going into it.

I mean… I know appeals are supposed to be organized and orderly and under oath… But based on some of the accounts I’ve read from others who’ve been through it, it seems like many employers see the process as a joke and just say whatever they want, true or otherwise.