From the Sun Prairie Star:
People stopped traveling when the coronavirus pandemic hit, costing Jessica Barrera her job at Groome Transportation, an airport shuttle service with an office in Eau Claire.
So the 40-year-old single mother joined nearly 70,000 other laid-off Wisconsinites during that third week of March: She filed her first weekly unemployment claim.
She filed another claim the next week. And the next. And the next. She continued until the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development denied her claims in a letter that explained in bold, capital letters:
“THE CLAIMANT CANNOT RECEIVE SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY PAYMENTS AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS CONCURRENTLY.”
“I cried for days,” Barrera said. “I thought (unemployment assistance) was going to be my saving grace to help me get by until my job opened.”
Barrera has polycythemia vera, a rare disease that causes her body to produce too many red blood cells. The condition can lead to strokes, blood clots, miscarriages and other complications.
She takes a blood thinner and has 16 ounces of blood removed from her body monthly to control her symptoms. She also says she grapples with depression and anxiety following a pair of family tragedies.
All that qualifies Barrera for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), a federally funded program for people who have worked and paid Social Security taxes but can no longer perform “substantially gainful activity.”
SSDI guidelines allow and encourage part-time work so long as she does not earn more than $1,260 per month. “You have to stay poor to keep your health care to stay alive,” Barrera said.
About 175,000 working-age Wisconsinites rely on SSDI to supplement their income. But the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2013 passed a law barring that group from simultaneously receiving unemployment insurance after losing work.
George
Wentworth, an unemployment insurance specialist with the National
Employment Law Project, a nonprofit that supports protections for
low-wage workers and the unemployed, said he knows of only one other
state — North Carolina — that also explicitly bans tapping both
programs. ...
Barrera is appealing with the pro bono help of Victor Forberger,
supervising attorney for the University of Wisconsin’s Unemployment
Compensation Appeals Clinic, who said he is representing about 20 people
with similar cases. Forberger accuses Wisconsin of discriminating
against people with disabilities, saying the denials run counter to
Congress’ aim. ...
I live in North Carolina. I have been told that the governor has ordered that Social Security disability recipients will qualify for Pandemic Unemployment Insurance. However, I'm not so sure that there aren't other states with the same issue as Wisconsin.
It's complicated. Sometimes a state's unemployment definition of "work" is different than SSA's definition, with a gap allowing some claimants to get both, but it depends on state law. For example, if a state's unemployment criteria permit benefits even if the claimant is only able to work part-time, then that wouldn't be inconsistent with a claim for disability benefits, which only requires an inability to work on a regular and continuing basis (i.e. full time).
ReplyDeleteWentworth's statement is interesting. My state doesn't care if a claimant applies for disability benefits, they even encourage it when the claimant is seeking unemployment benefits. Which is really dumb, because SSA holds it against the claimant. Interesting that only Wisconsin and North Carolina have expressly barred receipt of both benefits. That certainly would simplify a lot of the issues, and potentially even protect a lot of disability claimants.
During normal times it is difficult to receive both UI and DI because most states limit UI to 26 weeks, a period that expires during the DI waiting period. What has happened in the recent past, and may be going on now, is that during particularly bad economic times states have extended UI beyond 26 weeks. Also, as it appears in this case the two may be concurrent when a DI beneficiary attempts to return to work but then loses that job while still in their trial work period or extended period of eligibility and thus can resume receiving DI benefits while being eligible for UI. I believe that states can legally deny UI to people receiving DI but the reality is that the numbers would probably be few and not a significant drain on the UI program.As for the additional $600, that would come from the federal government and not really impact the state UI program.
ReplyDeleteI thought none of the denied disability applicants ever go back to work and now there is controversy about some receiving unemployment, which in most states requires one to say he or she is able to work.
ReplyDelete@12:23
ReplyDelete9:49 here. They don't generally. The issue arises, for example, when a worker is terminated, they go to get unemployment with an honest belief that they will return to the workforce, but as it turns out their conditions either worsen, or else their former employer was making accommodations which aren't available to new hires. Then the former worker is left to seek disability benefits, but now SSA thinks they either were lying to get unemployment, or are now lying to get disability benefits.
States generally do require an unemployment applicant to affirm they are "able to work," probably because the Department of Labor requires this to be included by the States in structuring their unemployment programs. But, the Department of Labor doesn't define this term and the states vary a great deal on what degree of impairment would disqualify you, which in turn makes it a question of state law whether the claimant alleging they are able to work for unemployment purposes, while also alleging an inability to work for social security purposes.
For example, my state allows unemployment benefits as long as the claimant is able to work part-time, and the remainder is due to a disability. If anything, that actually supports a claim of disability. There's also the issue of a lot of states instituting exceptions for ADA accommodations, accommodations which SSA can't consider.
Milking the system, committing fraud. You cant tell one agency you can work and another you cant to get checks. Should be banned from both systems for fraud for life and all payments stopped.
ReplyDelete8:48 AM What if you can work 15-25 hours a week, but not consistently for 40 hours a week. Some states allow unemployment for part-time. Saying you can work 15-25 hours some/most weeks is not inconsistent with saying you can't work 40 hours a week. A friend of mine has schizophrenia and he has "episodes" several times a week. He delivers food and sometimes he can work 2-3 hours without problems. But, during these episodes, he starts to stare and is incapable of performing even simple tasks. They can last for hours and generally require him to sleep it off. The only reason he probably has been able to keep the job is because his manager is willing to. Most would not, because he isn't reliable enough for most people. In other words, his manager does much more than most would to accommodate him. But, he has made enough money (barely) to qualify for unemployment if layed off. But, I am sur you would consider that to be "milking the system."
ReplyDelete