Another reason moving sucks.
November 24, 2010 2:24 PM Subscribe
My work is moving me to a different city (Los Angeles). Can my fiancé collect unemployment?
My fiancé will have to quit his job (at a bar owned by friends of ours) to move with me. We've heard, but I cant confirm that this could qualify him for unemployment benefits if he can't find a job before we go up, or right away. I'm trying to look around at the unemployment website, but it really does not spell anything out for this sort of situation. Seems like he might be a voluntary quit that qualifies because he is compelled to move.
See: http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_5.htm#Voluntary%20(Moving%20Party)
Has anyone had any experience with this? Also, We've never had experience with unemployment before (lucky us) - does this mean his current job (remember: at a place owned by our friends) would be contacted and asked to pay for his unemployment? That seems weird. This also seems so strange to me as we aren't even married yet (date is set for Dec 2011, after we move).
Oh, and to specify... We're in California now as well. Thanks!
My fiancé will have to quit his job (at a bar owned by friends of ours) to move with me. We've heard, but I cant confirm that this could qualify him for unemployment benefits if he can't find a job before we go up, or right away. I'm trying to look around at the unemployment website, but it really does not spell anything out for this sort of situation. Seems like he might be a voluntary quit that qualifies because he is compelled to move.
See: http://www.edd.ca.gov/UIBDG/Voluntary_Quit_VQ_5.htm#Voluntary%20(Moving%20Party)
Has anyone had any experience with this? Also, We've never had experience with unemployment before (lucky us) - does this mean his current job (remember: at a place owned by our friends) would be contacted and asked to pay for his unemployment? That seems weird. This also seems so strange to me as we aren't even married yet (date is set for Dec 2011, after we move).
Oh, and to specify... We're in California now as well. Thanks!
The unemployment check is not "paid" by the employer. The employer pays for the insurance for their employees, and their insurance rate goes up when employees file claims.
But I don't think you will have to worry about that, because I doubt a claim will be approved. Far as I know, fiance is not a legally recognized status. I would be really surprised if you could make that work. And even if you did, I doubt they would charge that against the former employer (or the employer could fight it), because that employer had nothing to do with that person leaving.
And moving doesn't mean what you think it does in that link. It means that the employee (claimant) made the first move in a chain of events that led to termination of employment. Because in almost all cases, if the employee leaves, they do not qualify for unemployment compensation.
posted by gjc at 6:38 PM on November 24, 2010
But I don't think you will have to worry about that, because I doubt a claim will be approved. Far as I know, fiance is not a legally recognized status. I would be really surprised if you could make that work. And even if you did, I doubt they would charge that against the former employer (or the employer could fight it), because that employer had nothing to do with that person leaving.
And moving doesn't mean what you think it does in that link. It means that the employee (claimant) made the first move in a chain of events that led to termination of employment. Because in almost all cases, if the employee leaves, they do not qualify for unemployment compensation.
posted by gjc at 6:38 PM on November 24, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
If you were married, your job moving you would be an acceptable reason.
Once a former employee files for unemployment, a letter is sent to the former employer asking for details to confirm that the information matches. If the former employer does not contest the claim, it still doesn't guarantee approval. I know when I was doing HR at a previous job, we did not contest claims, but more than once an employee was denied for filing the claim in such a way that the employee looked to be the moving party.
posted by Zophi at 2:48 PM on November 24, 2010