Why are the Unemployment Appeal Statistics Posted for Minnesota Wrong?

Unemployment Appeal Statistics

Unemployment Appeal Statistics

Did you see the latest unemployment appeal statistics for Minnesota?  Well, if you haven’t, the Department of Labor has been publishing quarterly stats.  Unfortunately, their stats are wrong.

Unemployment Appeal Statistics in General

First, the types of appeals are endless.  Some people are appealing eligibility issues, while others are appealing their job search process or wage reports.  To lump these types of appeals into one category with one number is ridiculous.

Second, acquiring Minnesota’s reversal statistics specific to an unemployment appeal is nearly impossible.   Even with the Freedom of Information Act, pulling data specific to the reversal rates of an unemployment appeal is almost a lost cause.

Third, the numbers reported are exclusive to cases involving an “appellant”.  In Minnesota, an applicant seeking benefits doesn’t get called an appellant until they appeal to Minnesota’s Court of Appeals.

Even more significant, there are four types of unemployment appeals.  Getting to the Court of Appeals is Level 3.  Everybody appealing to the Court of Appeals have lost at the first or second level.  The data posted by the Department of Labor fail to include cases that were reversed during a phone hearing or reconsideration.

Further, the Court of Appeals doesn’t charge a court fee to applicants and employers seeking an appeal.  In my experience, this means cases that have no business being appealed are indeed, getting appealed.

Thus, we are left with a number that doesn’t mean what people think it means.

What This Means for Applicants in Minnesota

The posted numbers should mean absolutely nothing to Applicants trying to appeal their case.  Everybody has a different story  or event that led to an appeal.  Assuming otherwise lessens the process.

Instead, I encourage my Clients to focus on the “why” a case is going to be successful.  Submit evidence and applying the strongest applicable rule favoring eligibility is a much stronger position.

For those who need one-on-one attention, please contact me directly.

 

 

Comments