Committee hears bill to protect unemployment eligibility for employees who volunteer for employer layoff programs
Loading...
Summary
HB 2264 would codify an Employment Security Department rule so employees who volunteer for an employer’s reduction‑in‑force plan remain eligible for unemployment benefits even if they are allowed to rescind their volunteer offer; worker advocates and affected employees described court precedent that has denied benefits in such cases.
Staff told the Labor and Workplace Standards Committee that House Bill 2264 codifies existing Employment Security Department guidance but changes a key element: it removes a court‑interpreted “final action” requirement that had required the employer to take the final step in the separation process for a worker to receive unemployment insurance. Under the bill, an employee who participates in an employer‑initiated layoff or reduction‑in‑force program may still be eligible for benefits so long as the termination is the result of that employer plan, even if the employer allows an employee to rescind.
Worker advocates and a worker who said he was denied benefits testified in support. Roy O'Sullivan (Washington Employment Benefits Advocates) said courts have treated situations where employees could rescind their volunteer as voluntary quits and denied benefits; HB 2264 would prevent that outcome. Timothy Fizer described participating in an employer restructuring severance program while being told he would be eligible for unemployment, but later having his claim denied and exhausting savings as a result.
Witnesses and committee members discussed follow‑up questions about whether severance or retirement payments affect unemployment eligibility; staff and ESD representatives said they would provide follow‑up information in writing. Patrick Connor (NFIB) raised concerns about ESD solvency and asked how severance or retirement payments would interact with benefit calculations. The committee closed the hearing on HB 2264 and requested follow‑up information from ESD on severance and retirement implications for eligibility.
No vote was taken during the hearing.
