Attn. Calif subs. Please write a complaint to EDD

Discussion in 'Substitute Teachers' started by oldstudent, Sep 1, 2010.

  1. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 1, 2010

    In today's difficult economy, times are tough.

    But when nearly all employees are laid off, they are at least permitted to collect unemployment.

    Yet because we are schools employees, there is a code that exempts us from collecting during summer recess, a code that applies to other school employees, as well it should.

    However, we are a special breed whose circumstances are far different from all other school employees. Therefore I feel it is grossly unfair to lump us with these other employees.

    Other school employees are truly "reassured" of returning to their jobs in September.
    They know they will work all year and every day, and get paid for every day.

    Subs on the other hand are unfairly lumped into this group simply because the disctricts send us these "Letters of reasurrance" that we will return in the fall.

    These letters of reassurance, however, do not insure that you will even get a dime the rest of the year. They only insure that you are eligible to be called for work, and are eligible to seek daily work.

    Theoretically, we can be offered no work all year, but be disallowed unemployment only because we get these letters of reassurance.

    I did my part by writing to the EDD office, and explaining my situation to a judge a few years back.
    It was to no avail, but maybe if others complain they might alter some things.

    I am worried this year because the sub tech at my most lucrative district says she is not to optimistic regarding work for subs this year.
    So much for the worthless reassurance letter. All it reassures is that we cannot collect unemployment.

    Conversely, my best freind works for a labor union, and sits home five months every year while collecting full unemployment.



    I would like to see us flood the EDD office with our complaints.
     
  2.  
  3. Ms. I

    Ms. I Maven

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,874
    Likes Received:
    158

    Sep 1, 2010

    What a coincidence! I now have to pay back a total of $692 I got in June (including a 30% overpayment penalty) due NOW because EDD says I withheld or gave false info regarding getting reassurance for work. The thing is, I've gotten $ from them in past summers, so I guess in this economy, even EDD's short on money & is trying to get as much back as possible!

    And you're exactly right. How do we mk EDD see that although we get those reassurance letters, that doesn't really mean squat because God knows when we'll get called. I could appeal it, but these days (temporarily) I work M-F & don't have time to go to talk to a judge. I'll pay the $ back, but they don't have a due date on my letter, so I was really going to stall & mk them wait for it. :mad::mad::mad:

    I talked to a judge some mos ago who said that the law states that as long as you get reassurance, you're not eligible for unemployment. I played dumb & may like I didn't know that, but I didn't want to argue w/ him about how reassurance letters don't mean squat.
     
  4. Peachyness

    Peachyness Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,181
    Likes Received:
    1

    Sep 1, 2010

    I had a phone interview today. UGH! I made a mistake on a claim form back in June. Actually, the district paid me MORE than I was expecting (long story). SO, I did the right thing and emailed EDD that I didn't claim the full amount. In discussing it with the man, he told me that I shouldn't have received money during the summer. I honestly didn't even think about it. I didn't know that I shouldn't. He said it was their mistake. I wonder if they will make me pay that back????
     
  5. Ms. I

    Ms. I Maven

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,874
    Likes Received:
    158

    Sep 1, 2010

    Unfortunately, probably yes Peachy. EDD must be making a lot of people pay back the $ given to them all of a sudden. :mad:
     
  6. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 2, 2010

    I am beginning to think that just maybe in the past, I could have applied for unemployment, without making mention of these bogus reassurance letters.
    However, since I have always worked for at least three districts, they could have investigated me, so I didn't think it worth the risk.

    When I leave the field of education, and know for sure I will not return, I will write a guest editorial about this to our local newspaper, maybe even the LA Times, so millions will know of this unfairness.

    In the meantime, I wholeheartidly suggest that all subs reading this go to EDD's website, and tell them why this is unfair. If they get dozens of letters, it might just open their eyes a bit.

    They actually did get back to me a few years ago and merely stated they would look into it, but I am sure they did nothing.
    Let's bombard them!
     
  7. SPECIALEDMAN

    SPECIALEDMAN Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 2, 2010

    I know that districts and states do everything differently it seems; but in my district her in N.C. our subs complete a “letter of intent”. This letter confirms that you do want to continue receiving calls for the school year. It also states in this letter that you are considered “on call” on an “as needed basis” and are not guaranteed any work.

    Maybe I’m wrong; but I always assumed that this was sort of the nature of the job.
     
  8. Ms. I

    Ms. I Maven

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,874
    Likes Received:
    158

    Sep 2, 2010

    oldstudent, regarding your 1st sentence in your 2nd post, I personally have NEVER mentioned anything about how I always get a reassurance letter or any other mention about those letters to EDD. So, way by now, they know how the procedure works (the getting reassurance every Aug, etc.)

    But you're right. EDD will never do anything to fix this unless a huge amt of substitutes complain. When I have the chance, I'll should contact EDD about this through their site.

    SPECIALEDMAN, yes, I too get those papers every summer that I have to sign & send back to my district stating that I still want to be a sub for the following school yr. Then, it's later in the summer when they send out the reassurance letters.
     
  9. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 3, 2010

    The reasurrance letters state, in effect, that you can go ahead and file a claim, but that because you are recieving "this" reasurance letter, the law states you are not eligible.

    The verbage of these letters bother me, it's like they are saying " HAHA, here is your reassurance letter, you can't get unemployment."
     
  10. Special-t

    Special-t Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    19

    Sep 4, 2010

    I've heard of this caveat ... if your school district has year-round school, and you're available to sub, but get no calls you can claim unemployment during the breaks. In my district, I think winter break is excluded because all the schools are on break.
     
  11. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,958
    Likes Received:
    2,114

    Sep 4, 2010

    Not in Cali- but as a sub, this is the nature of the job. You should have known the conditions under which you would be working before going into the position. With the current economic climate, school budgets, and the general fiscal crisis in California, you shouldn't count on a successful conclusion to this effort. Have you considered supplementing your income with other jobs? Even full-time employed professional educators work extra jobs during the summer (and during the school year as well).
     
  12. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    This is my point. It SHOULD NOT be the nature of the jobs. Maybe if more subs cared, something would get done. Or at least the EDD will know that we know it is unfair and that we are willing to stand against it: win or lose.

    I have been in this position for 13 years, so I have been aware all of this all this time.

    I work as a tutor part time, but this also shuts down in the summer.

    I am more concerned this year because I anticipate less work this year.

    I am also troubled my the fact that my friend's union has dozens of employees that are able to rip off the system by collecting unemplyment five months a year, every year, and then when work is available, they can still turn it down and collect longer instead of work.

    The system is grossly unfair.
     
  13. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    I'm sorry, I have to agree with czacza...a sub should understand that the school year is when they can be expected to earn money...when the school year ends, even though they have no source of income, they know that is going to occur, so imo it's correct that they shouldn't get unemployment. In my opinion, this should be true EVEN IF they don't (or aren't allowed to) come back in the Fall as a sub.

    In my mind the main difference is foreknowledge...most people who are laid off have no idea it is coming. In my mind subbing is a temporary job (yes many people sub from year to year for many years and I understand that) but it is a job that is filled only throughout the school year. Because the summer comes and you're not working shouldn't qualify you for unemployment..in my opinion, that's like a regular teacher applying for it who's coming back in the Fall.

    Again, just my two cents, I'm sure many people on this board will disagree with me and that's fine, but this is just my opinion.
     
  14. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    sorry just read your post old student...just because other people in other industries are doing something that seems unfair shouldn't mean that you should get to do it too...wouldn't it make more sense to fix that unfair practice (because we are ALL paying for that) rather than extend that "unfair" practice to more areas and jobs?
     
  15. anewstart101

    anewstart101 Cohort

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Messages:
    667
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    Now I had a question -- I took a job --- only after I accepted the position and signed the contract

    I found it was for a one year replacement --

    I was hired as a temporary teacher -- job ends in june 2011

    I wont have a job or a letter of reassurance

    I should be able to get unemployment at the end of the year

    they tell me who knows what next year will bring --
     
  16. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    You are right. I do disagree.

    All other school employees are truly reassured of coming back to work. They know that they will work everyday and receive a 12 month salary over 9-10 months. Therefore I do agree with the code as it pertains to all other school employees.

    If they do get laid off, then they are no longer employed and will collect from EDD.

    There is no point in laying off subs, however, because they can employ a thousand of us and simply never call us for work. It does not matter how many of us on on their call list because they only pay for what they need.
    However, according to my sub tech, there will not be much work this year.
    We are therefore employed without wages. Being employed without wages is much like union workers who collect any time throughout the year they do not work.

    We do not have any reassurance of even earning a dime, so we should not be catagorized the same way as all other school employees.
    As an absolute minimum, we should be allowed to collect beginning in September when the school year begins and there is still no work.

    I am lucky because at least I can live off of my investments if I need to, but what if I had no such fall back?
    Government assistance is about $340/month.

    Am I to go homeless because I chose to be a substitute teacher, and there is no other work available?

    Should union unskilled laborers with no education earn endless unemployment while we earn not a penny?

    Most probably disagree with me, but I feel we are far too valuable to be taken advantage of by the system.
     
  17. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    If you get no letter of reassurance, you will be able to collect unemployment.
     
  18. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 5, 2010

    Oldstudent...as you pointed out, you are hired as a sub with no guarantee that you will be utilized at all...that is the nature of sub work in its most basic form. Districts hire many more subs than they need on a day to day basis because they have to hire for the "peaks" when they need lots of coverage. It costs them relatively little to do so since they spend little to nothing on "training" and really only have to process the sub's paperwork.

    If you really think about it, then, it would be nonsensical to offer unemployment to subs who are hired but don't get work...because that's probably the case with most subs...when I was in my credential program and became a sub for the local district, I worked about 10 days over a whole semester...does that mean that I should have gotten unemployment? In my opinion, of course it doesn't. I believe unemployment is for people who have regular, steady jobs, and then are laid off from those jobs. By definition, subbing is not a "regular" job (LTS are a grey area, and I could see possibly some relief for those people). Most subs like it because it has variety, you get to choose different work placements, but at the end of the day you go home and leave the school and the work behind...in that case, I don't think you can consider yourself in the same status as a regular employee (in education or not) who would qualify for unemployment....

    Let's use another extreme example...my babysitter...if I normally use her once a week, but then decide that I'm not going to use her anymore because times are tight and I can't afford it...should she qualify for unemployment? Of course not...it's not steady work and she has no expectation of getting that work...in my opinion subs fall into the same category...Please bear in mind that doesn't diminish how I feel about substitute teachers...substitute teaching is underrated and can be quite challenging, even from my limited experience. But, I strongly feel that a sub assignment in no way meets the criteria of qualifying for unemployment...
     
  19. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2010

    You are right. I do not consider myself to have the same status as the regular employee, which is why I do not feel this EDD code should apply to me.

    I think where Careerchanger and I disagree is how subs should be classified. I believe we should be classified as steady employees, much like union workers who do not always work ,but do collect.

    Most subs want to be regular contracted teachers, but it is not easy to achieve this goal. I therefore see no reason why this should not be looked upon as an entry level career, with possible advancement to a contracted teaching position.
    This is expecially true today where layoffs are more prevalent than new hires.
    When there is no work(as with the unions), I feel as though we should be granted the same compensation.

    It is of course "nonsensical" for anyone to spend more money than they have to, including the districts, but it is not nonsensical to those who may go all year, in theory, with no income, and therefore be forced to find another career because there is no EDD compensation.

    I do not agree with the babysitter analoogy because the person who hires babysitters is not a public or private organization or entity.
    However, those who work for babysitting organizations, if they exist, would be eligible for unemployment.

    I certainly would not expect unemployment if I work for a private household without corporate representation.

    Unfortunately, the only thing that will probabaly change this code is if the pool of subs dries up, and districts were forced to give us better compensation to keep us. But I am not holding my breath.

    Nevertheless, I will still write a guest editorial about this.

    If people reading it think I am an idiot , so be it. We work too hard and are too valuable to be treated by " the system" as if we do not matter.
     
  20. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2010

    I definitely don't think you're an idiot, you have your opinions and you're entitled to them...I think what you said has some merit, I just don't happen to agree.

    I do agree with your statement that nothing will change unless the sub pool dries up...but as you pointed out, that's not likely to happen anytime soon, especially with credentialed teachers being laid off every year and filling the sub ranks as well.

    BTW, I'm glad you didn't assume I was comparing subs to babysitters, I just couldn't think of a better analogy...I don't consider subs to be babysitters, but neither do I consider them to be steady, permanent employees.

    We'll agree to disagree, and that's okay...it's the good thing about America...take care.
     
  21. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2010

    I understand what you are saying, but considering the nature of our job, and who employs us, I do believe we should be considered as permanent employees, with subbing as a steppingstone to the next level.

    Since my freind with no education does unskilled labor for $27/hr. with full benefits, and collects unemployment five months out of every year until he retires, the system is broken.

    We should have more value than someone who moves boxes around for a living in the eyes of the EDD.

    Your opinion is based on what is. Mine is based on what I believe should be.
     
  22. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2010

    what job out there pays $27 for unskilled labor with full benefits anymore...? talk to anyone who works/worked for GM and those blue collar, union jobs are pretty much gone or very limited anymore...
     
  23. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2010

    The motion picture studios labor union.

    There is not enough work to go around, so they have dozens or more workers laying around collecting unemployment until it is their turn to be called.
    However, they do not have to go back to work if their turn comes up and they do not feel like it. They can just continue to collect unemployment and of course do not actively have to look for work.
    On average, my friend works seven month a year, and collects for five months. But at least he is honest and takes his turn.
     
  24. UCLACareerChngr

    UCLACareerChngr Comrade

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 7, 2010

    well, at least now I know why movies cost $100+ million to make and over $12 to watch...
     
  25. oldstudent

    oldstudent Comrade

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 7, 2010

    Exactly! I guess they have lots of money to throw around.

    I should add that their employees also get to keep all their health benefits while they are collecting.

    We get nothing, but that's a topic for another thread.
     

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. KSMathMom,
  2. TeacherNY
Total: 173 (members: 2, guests: 148, robots: 23)
test