When is Resignation Considered to Be For Good Cause
My question involves unemployment benefits for the state of: New York.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TLDR: I was working a full-time work schedule for my Federal employer but was being treated as an intermittent employee. I believed this (and other things) were in violation of Federal regulations, and were robbing me of about 10-15% of my wages, so I quit. Now the NYDOL is saying I didn't resign for good cause. Advice?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all! I'm sorry in advance - this question might be a bit complex because it involves Federal law/regulations and NY State unemployment benefits. However, if you're adventurous and feel like putting on your judge's hat, read on...
In 2010, I was offered a job as a payroll/human resources clerk with a Federal agency under the Department of Commerce. In the appointment paperwork, this job was described as "mixed-tour", meaning that it may include periods of part-time, full time, intermittent and/or furlough work. When I started my appointment, I was listed as having an "intermittent" work schedule. However, from my very first day, until the day I resigned 3 months later, I worked a full-time (8:30-5, M-F) schedule.
During the course of my employment, I began to question the morality (and legality) of some of the duties I was being asked to perform. There were more than a few times I'd go to my bosses with my concerns and get responses like "Well, that's the way headquarters wants it..." or "Don't go lookin' for no problems, we got enough problems!" or "I just do as I'm told."
Ironically, one of the duties that made me uncomfortable involved unemployment... While performing an audit of our personnel files, I noticed many of the separation reasons on ex-Federal employees' SF-50s (SF-50s are official records of personnel actions) were being changed from "Termination for Cause" to "Termination for Lack of Work". The changes had the effect of making many employees appear eligible for UI benefits (and perhaps other benefits like welfare?) who would not otherwise have been eligible. These employees were not even notified of the change to their personnel records. I know for a fact that the proper procedure for approving these questionable SF-50 changes wasn't even followed. We were simply told to change the documentation by our bosses, without any evidence that the change was warranted. Changing around long-term Federal records without a strong and clear basis for doing so seemed more than a bit odd to me, but I wasn't sure if it was outright illegal (in fact, I'm still not sure).
Therefore, before I was going to jeopardize my job, I wanted to gain a better understanding of the regulations and gather some hard evidence to bring to my supervisors that what we were doing was breaking Federal regulations. Since I was never given work-time to read the 1300 page administrative manual or the 2700 page Title 5 CFR, (in fact, I was never even trained for this position), I decided to do some studying when I got home from work.
During my studies, I stumbled upon 5 CFR 340.403a, which has to do with the appropriate use of "intermittent" employment. I came to strongly believe that this regulation was being violated as it related to me, because I (and many of my other so-called 'intermittent' co-workers) had been working a full time work schedule for nearly 3 months, even though we were labeled as "intermittent" employees.
After some additional study of 5 CFR 340.403a to ensure I was correct (its applicability, etc.), I decided to confront my boss. So, I printed out the regulation text, some of the work schedules that my boss had given me, and the following Department of Commerce webpage: http://hr.commerce.gov/Practitioners...e/DEV01_006627.
I also wrote up a resignation letter which stated something like: "Due to its inability to conform to 5 CFR 340.403a, I must resign my appointment, effective immediately." I kept the resignation letter in an envelope in my back pocket, intending to only hand it in if my boss refused to follow this Federal regulation.
During a very civil and cordial (and nervous!) 5-10 minute discussion with my second-level supervisor, I gave her the evidence and in return I was given the run-around. Multiple times I was told that I was hired as an "intermittent employee". I finally asked if anything could be done to change my work status to full-time so I could get accurate credit and benefits for the full-time hours I was working, but was met with further insistence that I was an "intermittent employee". This supervisor was really sticking to her guns. I then took the resignation letter from my back pocket and said that I did not want to resign, but that if management was not going to do anything about my intermittent work status, I would tender my resignation. The supervisor said something like, "Well, if you have to resign because of something that's going on in your personal life, that's OK." And so I tendered my resignation.
The kicker? When I received my final SF-50 (for my separation) nearly 3 months later, it says "Resignation for Personal Reasons".
I would hardly call my resignation reason "personal". I had no other job lined up and wasn't planning to go to school or anything like that. I resigned only because I thought that it was the right (and the only) thing to do. I'm still proud to this day that even though I knew full well that I'd have an uphill battle for unemployment (if I needed to file for it, which I tried to avoid) that I did the right thing.
Unfortunately for me though, I ran down my savings to nearly nothing while looking for a job in this craptastic job market. And so I was forced to apply for unemployment.
Naturally, after being bounced around the NJ and NY unemployment systems, I was recently denied NY State unemployment benefits. They're saying that I quit without good cause.
Of course, I'm filing for a hearing within the next week because I really do believe I resigned for good cause. And, I'm not sure whether or not I will have legal representation (a legal aid society has yet to get back to me). I can't afford a lawyer, and even if I could, what lawyer in his or her right mind would want to take a case like mine?
So, as you can imagine, I have a few technical questions after all of that! (Thanks for staying with me.)
1. Is resignation for being a victim of your employer's violations of Federal regulations (or is being told to do things that are against Federal regulations) considered "with good cause" in the state of New York? I'm assuming that it is, but when I read the NY Labor law, I didn't see it explicitly mentioned.
2. Would you say my resignation was too hasty? I believe I could have went (and as far as I know, I can still go) to the Office of Special Counsel, but that seemed to me to be the "nuclear option" - analagous to calling 911 for a car alarm going off. I could have also made an official written grievance to my boss, but considering that written grievance a.) would have made my bosses look like idiots in front of their bosses, and b.) could have been shred upon my separation/termination, and c.) would have cost my Federal employer possibly millions in liability and back wages, etc. and therefore d.) would have incented my bosses to sweep me under the rug by terming me for lack of work, I didn't think that route was too good an idea. I wanted to keep my job while getting paid the correct wage, so I opted for the less formal grievance approach which was laid out in the administrative handbook.
3. Any advice for me if I have to represent myself at this hearing before the ALJ? I can get real nervous in public situations, so I'm trying to prepare as best I can in advance.
4. If you were one of the lawyers on the opposing side of this case, assuming I can prove everything I've said above, what would your likely arguments be like?
5. The amount of wages in question (paid holidays, annual leave, sick leave, and an employee transit subsidy) come out to about $1000 total over the 3 months of employment. This was about 15% of my total earnings during the period. I was going to let sleeping dogs lie, but considering all the hassle this whole mess is putting me through (not to mention, my current financial situation), I might just try to recoup those back wages if I'm entitled to them... Is there an easy way to make a claim for back pay during this hearing process, or would I have to do something really time-consuming like file a Federal Tort Claim or something equally ridiculous?
Oh well, thanks for reading and double thanks for any responses you might have, even if it's to just to tell me to stop being so damned verbose. :D
-H
Re: Did This Ex-Federal Employee Resign for Good Cause You Be the Judge
When you hand your boss a resignation letter, you should plan on it being accepted.
You quit. You quit because you believe you were working in violation of regulations. You appeal your UI rejection and bring them the proof. However, I will tell you that your resignation torpedoed your chances.
And yes, I think you were WAY too worried about things that had nothing to do with your job. Sometimes, termination information is changed just so folks can get UI. It is considered a humanitarian act. What did you think would happen when you told your boss that helping out former employees was a violation of law (which it wasn't) and started shoving regulations in people's faces? You were an employee that worked there 3 months. Do you really think you knew more about the regulations than your employer?
You aren't eligible for back wages... especially vacation, sick leave or holidays... and you are not eligible for a transit subsidy if you were not working for the company at the time. You are asking to be paid for time you didn't work after 3 months. That won't happen.
Last but not least... get a hobby. No boss likes to have a new employee start reading from the manual to tell them what they are doing wrong. Most of us would, at the very least, find that annoying....
Re: Did This Ex-Federal Employee Resign for Good Cause You Be the Judge
Good luck trying to get UI benefits.
You are resigned from your position for personal reasons as stated in your SF-50. The personal reason being that you felt you were being ill used. While you may be correct in your assertions (and it appears that you are) there are internal mechanisms for reporting. You admit that you were aware of these. If you had reported the discrepency and subsequently termed or terminated you would have a much better claim for wrongful termination.
Right now you're arguement is that you were being asked to work a 40hr work week rather than the limit of 32hrs. So, you were given an additional 8hrs to earn some money. You decided that it wasn't fair and resigned in lieu of following proper protocols. That is your fault.
If you had followed the right procedures you may have discovered that the agency has a loophole, or some other decree that allows them to employee you full time around the current regulations. It happens a lot.
Re: Did This Ex-Federal Employee Resign for Good Cause You Be the Judge
Hey guys and girls, thanks for your advice (even you, cyjeff!)
I don't want to sound like someone who's ungrateful or who's trying to argue their case in these forums, but I believe that from the responses I got so far, there may have been some miscommunication in my initial post. Sorry, I wrote it early in the morning after an all-nighter preparing for the UI hearing.
Anyway, I'd just like to clear a few things up that I saw in the responses...
Quote:
And yes, I think you were WAY too worried about things that had nothing to do with your job. Sometimes, termination information is changed just so folks can get UI. It is considered a humanitarian act.
Auditing the Official Personnel Folders for correctness and completeness was part of my job. I was directed to do it by my bosses. During the course of that job, I noticed disparities between the records in the physical OPF and the records in the computer. If official termination information was changed simply so "folks can get UI" for "humanitarian" reasons, I'd think that'd be fraud against the state or Federal government, no? And asking me to participate in that fraud by having me pull the old switcheroo on long-term Federal records would be asking me to break the law, no? Of course, I'm no lawyer and I wasn't trained in these administrative and legal matters, so I can only give my common sense opinion of things. What I DID know was that screwing around with long-term documents without a good basis seemed fishy to me, and that I didn't trust many of my bosses (due to prior interactions with them) to give me the correct directives. That's why I started looking up Federal regulations in the first place, in order to have guidance that didn't seemingly rely on the whims of my bosses.
***By the way, as of right now, my personal opinion is that employees' termination reasons were changed to "lack of work" in order to make the selections process look more efficient than what it actually was. After all, it looks much more attractive to your supervisors when you hire 5% incapables/troublemakers than when you hire 15% incapables/troublemakers... My problem with this was that it made many people appear eligible for UI or welfare benefits who otherwise would not have been. Another problem is that these employees were never notified of the changes. Things were just sorta swept under the rug, and I don't think that was right.
Quote:
You aren't eligible for back wages... especially vacation, sick leave or holidays... and you are not eligible for a transit subsidy if you were not working for the company at the time. You are asking to be paid for time you didn't work after 3 months. That won't happen.
I am not, and would never ask for back wages for periods of time where I wasn't entitled to them. All I was asking for at the time was to be paid the legal wage for the work that I did do. To repeat: if I have any valid back-wages claim, at this point I believe it would only be for the 3 months I worked, and only for the difference in compensation between full-time work and intermittent work.
Alright, now onto some of the more constructive advice!
Quote:
You are resigned from your position for personal reasons as stated in your SF-50. The personal reason being that you felt you were being ill used.
From my understanding of the issue, I believe a resignation for being ill-used is generally applied to cases where, for instance, an Academy Award winner is made to act in a kindergarten play, or a Nobel Prize winning chemist is assigned to make cheesy volcanoes for a grammar school. Although I had a high confidence in my work ethic, and on many ocassions I was correcting my bosses, I'm not sure that my talents were being grossly underutilized in such a manner.
However, I still have that nagging question about resigning for personal reasons. Does resigning because you believe your Federal employer is violating Federal regulations constitute a resignation for "personal reasons"? In my resignation letter, I explicitly stated my resignation reason and even mentioned the specific regulation in question...
I'm embarrasssed that I can't answer these questions myself, considering I worked in human resources for the Federal government, but as I said these issues are very complicated and I was never trained properly. I've been trying to find the answers regarding this for a long while now.
Quote:
While you may be correct in your assertions (and it appears that you are) there are internal mechanisms for reporting. You admit that you were aware of these. If you had reported the discrepency and subsequently termed or terminated you would have a much better claim for wrongful termination.
Well, I did follow an internal grievance procedure as set out in the administrative handbook. That procedure did not give me the results I was looking for and so I felt I had to resign. While I may have had other options open to me (like contacting the Office of Special Counsel), I believed no other option to be appropriate under the circumstances, other than the ones I took.
I'm not sure that I have a claim for wrongful termination. I resigned and was not terminated. However, I should emphasize that I believe I did resign for good cause.
Quote:
Right now you're arguement is that you were being asked to work a 40hr work week rather than the limit of 32hrs. So, you were given an additional 8hrs to earn some money. You decided that it wasn't fair and resigned in lieu of following proper protocols. That is your fault.
I appreciated and was grateful for working 40 hour weeks, especially in this economy. However, I believe that this doesn't excuse the fact that the Federal agency was not paying me (or the 20ish other affected clerks) the appropriate wage for those 40 hour weeks. I would liken this situation to not paying someone time-and-a-half for overtime when they are legally entitled to it, or to scheduling someone's work around a holiday to avoid paying them their wages for that day.
I believe the Federal agency's management thought (if they thought anything at all) that the clerks would be grateful for having a job ---any job--- in this economy, even if it was a job where their rights under Federal law were being violated. Frankly, I believe that laws and regulations like 5 CFR 340.403a are in place to prevent exactly this kind of abuse.
I mean, do we really allow Federal agencies to use sweatshop tactics like this? I can understand trying to keep the costs of labor as low as possible, especially in times like these, but I don't think it's right to do it by violating Federal labor regulations and denying employees wages that they're entitled to, is it?
If resigning under such circumstances isn't considered to be with good cause, I dunno what is.
Sorry to ramble and be all melodramatic about it, but as you can tell, swimming around in this regulatory red-tape tedium has a way of turning a mind to mush. :wallbang:
Anyway, thanks again for any input. I really do appreciate all of it --- even (and especially) when I don't agree with it.
-H