Woman Denied Unemployment Benefits For Failing Test

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Her initial statement should say a lot. Let's be honest. She probably took the job knowing that she would fail the test and was hoping to get back on unemployment... However her plan backfired and now she's suffering the consequences.

--------------

http://www.wfaa.com/news/business/Failed-exam-disqualifies-mother-from-unemployment-121677129.html

CARROLLTON — As a single mother, Kay Sellers has survived a long twelve months — much of it spent laid off, looking for work.

"If you were given unemployment for whatever reason, stay on it for as long as you can," Sellers said sternly. "There is no incentive to come off of it, and that is really sad!"

Last fall, a major bank hired her to become a financial advisor.

But to keep her job, Sellers, 51, had to pass a tough test making sure she knew how to sell stocks and bonds.

When she failed that exam, which is known as a "Series 7," the state labeled it "misconduct" and then disqualified her from collecting unemployment again.

"Had I known going into it what the end result was going to be, I never would have stepped into it," Sellers said. "I would have stayed on my unemployment."

In denying her appeal, the Texas Workforce Commission cited precedence of another individual who once failed the same test. But the TWC revealed that person failed the Series 7 examination four times over one-year period.

Sellers says her situation doesn't compare. She had one chance in a 90-day period.

The Texas Workforce Commission said state law forbids it from discussing individual cases. But in responding to her appeal, the agency wrote:

"If an individual accepts a job with the understanding that continued employment depends upon the taking and passing of a ... test, the failure to pass that test constitutes misconduct."

"I had a garage sale actually last week selling off some things that I have," Sellers admitted. "More than likely I'll have to downsize possibly."

Sellers said she is maxing out her credit cards while continuing to look for work.

The state is sending the wrong message, Sellers explained, by penalizing people for trying to find a good job.

[Yeena 17]

Her initial statement should say a lot. Let's be honest. She probably took the job knowing that she would fail the test and was hoping to get back on unemployment... However her plan backfired and now she's suffering the consequences.

How on earth did you get that impression?

Her statement is clear: she believes the system strongly encourages people not to find work. This is because she tried to get a job -- and when she was unable to pass the test associated with it, she lost not only the job but also her unemployment benefits. In other words, if she hadn't been trying to get a job in the first place, she would have been better off. But because she did try to find work (and possibly was desperate enough to try for a job she was not 100% qualified for), she is now in a worse position than she otherwise would be.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

How on earth did you get that impression?

Her statement is clear: she believes the system strongly encourages people not to find work. This is because she tried to get a job -- and when she was unable to pass the test associated with it, she lost not only the job but also her unemployment benefits. In other words, if she hadn't been trying to get a job in the first place, she would have been better off. But because she did try to find work (and possibly was desperate enough to try for a job she was not 100% qualified for), she is now in a worse position than she otherwise would be.

Common sense tells you not to take a job you know you're not going to be able to keep.

Obviously she was searching for something out of her league. It's not like there aren't PLENTY of jobs for her either. This is North Texas. It's actually one of the few placed where it's hard to find employees than it is to find a job.

There's much more to this story than she's making it out to be.

If she lived in another part of the country, maybe I could swallow it, but here. No way Jose.

[rika60607 215]

So her plan was what exactly?

How many more months would she be able to stay on unemployment?

Does 3 months employment "restart" the clock for unemployment elegibility? I thought you had to keep a job longer than that to qualify for unemployment.

[Tim/Mav 305]

She should have known that Passing the Series 7 is not an easy task. ( National Association of Securities Dealers ) That is a very difficult Exam. She would also had to Pass the Series 63 Exam after the Series 7.

It is a Stockbrokers License and even most Currant Brokers would need a refresher Course just to pass it. It requires a 70% margin or better.

I don't think she Failed the test on Purpose though.

I went to school for it and took me several attempts to pass the test.

[^_^ 5,021]

Yeah LOTS of people fail Series 7 on the first try and quite a few never manage to pass at all. Failing that is misconduct?

[Yeena 17]

Common sense tells you not to take a job you know you're not going to be able to keep.

Obviously she was searching for something out of her league. It's not like there aren't PLENTY of jobs for her either. This is North Texas. It's actually one of the few placed where it's hard to find employees than it is to find a job.

There's much more to this story than she's making it out to be.

If she lived in another part of the country, maybe I could swallow it, but here. No way Jose.

So, a number of months ago she lost her job and the unemployment benefits. Now, with the benefit of neither, she is still trying to find a job, and hasn't been able to.

And yet you think the obvious explanation is she was just pretending to get the financial advisor job when really she could have easily gotten another job?

As the other posters here have indicated, it is not an easy test, and not at all uncommon for people in that field to take it a couple times to pass. She had no way of knowing that she would be unable to keep the job, but you seem to think she should be faulted for even trying. It is not clear from the article what her actual qualifications are, but it's very possible she would be considered 'overqualified' and unhirable for the jobs you believe are available, and this bank job is the only sort of employment she is likely to get.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The problem is not whether it is miconduct or not, the problem is that we have unemployment and that some governemtn agency has this ability at all. when low paying jobs become the source of "unemployment" compensation, we will all be a lot better off. Rahter than go through all this BS for $450 per week (the top UEI compensation in this state) why not just get a job at McDonalds or Lowes or Walmart (all of which are paying $10 + per hour in this area)

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The problem is not whether it is miconduct or not, the problem is that we have unemployment and that some governemtn agency has this ability at all. when low paying jobs become the source of "unemployment" compensation, we will all be a lot better off. Rahter than go through all this BS for $450 per week (the top UEI compensation in this state) why not just get a job at McDonalds or Lowes or Walmart (all of which are paying $10 + per hour in this area)

because people are 'too good' for that.

[rika60607 215]

I am too good for a job in McDonalds. Objectively.

because people are 'too good' for that.

[Yeena 17]

The problem is not whether it is miconduct or not, the problem is that we have unemployment and that some governemtn agency has this ability at all. when low paying jobs become the source of "unemployment" compensation, we will all be a lot better off. Rahter than go through all this BS for $450 per week (the top UEI compensation in this state) why not just get a job at McDonalds or Lowes or Walmart (all of which are paying $10 + per hour in this area)

You mean like when over a million people apply for one of only 62,000 McDonald's jobs?

That's 950,000 people who were not 'too good' to apply for a McJob, but still didn't get it.

You may not have noticed, but we have a little structural unemployment issue currently going on here. Blaming people who are currently unemployed for being too haughty or too lazy to get a job is just nonsensical.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You mean like when over a million people apply for one of only 62,000 McDonald's jobs?

That's 950,000 people who were not 'too good' to apply for a McJob, but still didn't get it.

You may not have noticed, but we have a little structural unemployment issue currently going on here. Blaming people who are currently unemployed for being too haughty or too lazy to get a job is just nonsensical.

Not in North Texas.

There is a very little excuse factor here.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The problem is not whether it is miconduct or not, the problem is that we have unemployment and that some governemtn agency has this ability at all. when low paying jobs become the source of "unemployment" compensation, we will all be a lot better off. Rahter than go through all this BS for $450 per week (the top UEI compensation in this state) why not just get a job at McDonalds or Lowes or Walmart (all of which are paying $10 + per hour in this area)

I see a problem in this. If UI pays more than a job ($450.00 UI vs. $400.00 for 40 hours work at $10.00) then working becomes somewhat less attractive. Well, to some, at least. I've been out of a job for a few weeks in the past and the UI compensation sucked - it was way less than what I used to make and barely paid the rent and utilities. But what drove me nuts was sitting home all day not having a job to go to. I don't think it would have taken me any longer to find a job if UI would have been more. It's not that I didn't have money, I was just bored out of my mind not working.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You mean like when over a million people apply for one of only 62,000 McDonald's jobs?

That's roughly 15 applicants per position. That's not a lot to be honest. I remember when we first started hiring after coming out of the collapse, we saw as many as 600 applicants for a single job opening. Now that's a lot. Fifteen applicants for a position is really not much more than average.