Denied!

I really wanted to be done with this whole "getting fired" thing, but of course, if something looks to good to be true, it probably is. To wit, I guess you don't get unemployment insurance when you're fired. Of course, if you think about it, it kinda makes sense, right? I'll mention that I had grown concerned when I read on the enemployment website that your employment benefits may be "delayed" if you were terminated for reasons other than "lack of work" (laid off). I passed it off -- after all, when I was let go, they specifically handed me this piece of paper and said I'd need to bring it to the unemployment office. Seems they neglected to add "... except, don't bother, because you're not going to get any benefits."

Silly me for resting on my laurels. I'd slacked off a bit on the job search front because, well, for one, I don't like working and also because I wasn't sure if Vicki and I'd be moving soon. Now it seems my bank account will be left hanging a bit longer than expected. D'oh.

Not that I'm just going to leave it at that, mind you. I'm very persuasive when the chips are down, and there are these wonderful little thing called appeals. I wouldn't bother if I didn't have any ammunation in my metaphorical cannon. I did a little research, and it seems that to deny me benefits, it's on Tribune to prove that my "wilful misconduct" vis a vis being late was a "knowing rule violation." That basically means that I understood being late was against policy... and of course, I did. But, there's a few little clauses to consider. It's not considered a "knowing rule violation if":

1) Other employees must have been punished when they broke the same rule or policy (this is the big one)
2) If the rule was considered broken despite all instructions being followed and all work completed

...at least that's how it works in the state of Connecticut (I couldn't find the correct information on New York state, but here's hoping). There's a few more, but those are my key points. There's another one about the rule being "reasonable" that kinda ties in with number 2 above. I believe I've mentioned it before, but my arrival time at work had no impact on my performance there. I'm not sure if I can necessarily prove that, but I don't think they can disprove it, either. Now, the big gun for me is the other clause. I believe I mentioned this, too, but the guy who worked across from me practically worked whatever schedule he wanted -- he was doing it when I arrived, and likely is still doing it today. Hopefully, between the two, I can prove that my termination was unjust.

So, I'm not getting my hopes up or anything... and really, who knows how long it'll be before I have the hearing. That said, I'm ready for battle. The beauty of fighting a corporation is that, if you win, you're David and you've just slain goliath... but if you lose, then you're just another victim of corporate America and you can't feel too bad. I'll keep posting as the situation develops.