Eligibility - Had UI Benefits Once, Got Job, Lost Job, Reapplied for UI Benefits

[StayClassySanDiego]

My question involves unemployment benefits for the state of: California

So here it goes... I had a job for 5 year. Got let go from that job, applied and received unemployment. Then 7 months later I got a job. Held that job for 5 months and was let go for performance. Unemployment is going after my employer of 5 years for a second claim because of the lookback period. They are not asking my most recent employer because of california UI practices they look back essentially 18 months to six months ago, and break it up by quarter. They are calling to interview me next week because they are challenging my eligibility. I called and the customer service guy said they are probably going to ask some questions about why I can't hold the job.

I was hoping that someone can help me with what questions they are going to ask and how to answer those question, not going to make it too far without my UI benefits.

He also said there was a difference between "I was fired" and "I was laid off"... what is the difference?

Thank you all for your help, please reply with any questions....

[cbg]

"I was fired" = I no longer work for this company and there is no reasonable expectation that I ever will again.

"I was laid off" = While I am currently not at work for this company, there is a very real and reasonable expectation that it is only for a temporary period and that I will be recalled to work in the relatively near future.

[525601minutes]

fired = I did something wrong and the business does not want me to work there
laid off = the business is having financial trouble and couldn't keep me even though they liked me working there

[cbg]

Technically, no, that is not the case. That is how many employers are characterizing "no fault" firings because the word, fired, is such a hot button. But in actual fact, and for UI purposes particularly, if there is not a real and reasonable possibility of a recall, it is not a layoff, whether the employee did anything wrong or not.

[StayClassySanDiego]

Thank you for the help with that. I received a call from the UI office and know what specifically my interview is about. My past employer is disputing paying out compensation because:
Title 22, Section 1256-38(b)(2) provides:

"An employee's failure to produce the required quantity of work is misconduct if the employee was capable of meeting, could have met, and continually failed to meet the employer's reasonable quantity standards after reprimands or warnings. If an employee's unsatisfactory quantity of work is caused by some factor within his or her control, there is a duty to do whatever is reasonably necessary to bring the quantity of work up to an acceptable level.

Example 1- Failure to Perform Not Due to Inability:

In P-B-223, the claimant was a salesman who had worked for one year for a wholesale outlet. He was expected to call upon old customers and develop new customers in his territory and to submit weekly reports showing the calls he had made. The employer discharged him because of his neglect in making sufficient customer calls and by filing late reports. The claimant had been reprimanded concerning his performance.

The claimant admitted filing late reports, that at time of termination, his last three reports had all been late. He claimed that the employer had failed to supply him with certain price lists and this had caused him to lose "enthusiasm" for the work.

The employer testified that the claimant could average eight calls per day or forty per week. In weeks previous to his discharge the claimant made 14 calls in one week, 19 in another, and 12 calls in each of three other weeks. The claimant acknowledged that many more contacts could have been made. The Board found the claimant ineligible and stated:

The evidence in this case satisfies us that the claimant without good reason was seriously remiss in the performance of his duties as a salesman, and that his failure in this connection was intentional and in substantial disregard of the employer's interests. In none of the five weeks herein before mentioned did the claimant contact 30 customers, the minimal number which, by his own estimate, should have been contacted. A single instance of conduct of the type here involved might not constitute misconduct, but in our judgment, the claimant's continued failure to file reports and to contact customers in a number which could be reasonably expected of the average salesman, does amount to disqualifying misconduct, especially where, as here, the employer has placed the employee on notice that his performance is unsatisfactory. . . .

Note that there was no evidence that the claimant's failure was due to inability."

I had 1 month at full quota and then was let go. I accomplished all of the required prerequisites for the position (ie. Cold calls, networking events, meetings with potential customers, partner meetings, canvassing, etc..) but fell short when it came to production. I did not have the sales numbers to keep my job.

I need to make sure that I do a good job with the UI interview because it is going to be hard to support a family without any source of income.

Thank you for all the help!