how to win unemployment fact finding interview

My question involves labor and employment constabulary for the state of: Virginia

Hi everyone,

I was fired on July 12th 2016 for productivity where I final worked at I instantly applied unemployment benefits the day later on everything was going good until I got a observe today from Employment Commission for a fact-finding interview.

It says whether or not I was discharged suspended for misconduct and I am greatly confused because productivity misconduct is two unlike things so is my quondam employer verify my employment benefits and what should I say at the fact-finding interview any tips and advice volition help me greatly cheers.

Please check my answer on the other forum. As I said, in that location'south no trouble with the fact that they may say something unlike. The unemployment organisation volition go with the more believable of the 2 parties. Merely keep your story as it was and as unproblematic equally possible.

Then I only take to tell that what really went on and exist 100% honest about information technology? Many people told me when they had an fact-finding interview and when the words " I tried my best" they were denied.

So what ELSE do y'all think you could tell them? You are filing a claim for unemployment insurance. If yous lie about what happened, you are committing fraud to obtain benefits. That'due south non a good idea at all. You tin can present the information so that you don't tell them anything unnecessary that is going to be detrimental to your situation, but what happened has already happened.
You can't alter that. Yeah, many people are denied. In society to describe benefits, you are supposed to be out of work through no fault of your own. If you are, you are.

You can usually, we hope, always say, "I did my job to the best of my abilities." If you lot can't truthfully say that, don't say anything nearly it. In firings for performance issues, it is rarely a bad matter to say. Being unable to do your job adequately isn't misconduct if you tried. The employer's expectations may be unreasonable. They might ask y'all to sell fifty vacuum cleaners a calendar month. They might ask yous to spin straw into gilt. If you didn't practice your job because yous didn't try, didn't care, made no attempt at all, etc.

that is misconduct.

Reply the questions in the fact finding honestly and briefly. Do not dissemble, hem and haw, or attempt to be clever, quote unemployment police force, or argue with the fact finder. If you are denied in the initial decision, come up back and we will try to aid y'all word your appeal to your benefit. But facts are facts. Y'all must deal with what they are. This isn't a criminal case this is an agency hearing, and you will not get to brilliantly argue in front of a judge and jury. You lot merely say what happened, and they'll say what happened, and the determination volition be made based on unemployment law and which of your stories is more than believable.

As someone who had to become through a fact-finding interview for unemployment benefits, here'south my advice (very similar to what annotate/ator suggested): explicate your side of the story equally succinctly and clearly as possible. These people conducting the interviews have heard it all from anybody else. Just exist honest, explain you did your job to the best of your ability and worked hard at it. Being fired for under performing is not a disqualification to receiving benefits. Answer the interviewer's questions directly and quickly. Don't add together in all kinds of fluff.

Quote Quoting KBoy420

View Post

Being fired for nether performing is not a disqualification to receiving benefits.

It tin, and that's why people make mistakes that outcome in denials. If the employer tin show that you used to do a good job, and now aren't, that looks to be deliberate in many state UI systems.

Quote Quoting chyvan

View Post

It tin, and that'southward why people make mistakes that upshot in denials. If the employer tin show that you used to exercise a proficient job, and at present aren't, that looks to be deliberate in many state UI systems.

Except OP has said nothing whatsoever about performing better previously.

Quote Quoting eerelations

View Post

Except OP has said nothing whatsoever well-nigh performing improve previously.

Not actually conclusive of anything. Most claimants don't have a clue what makes poor functioning expect like misconduct so the OP wouldn't have necessarily known that it was an of import detail. Also, at that place is the version of the story that the employer might tell the UI people, and the employer might know how to make poor operation look like misconduct.

The point is that when a claimant knows what to look for, they tin can possibly modify the outcome by bringing up a key effect. Could be that the employee was doing just smashing in their old chore and had a contempo promotion. It's of import to raise the outcome that while they used to be a expert performer in the old chore, they can't be held to those same standards in the new job.