Return
Home
Rep
Karen Bass re Hyundai
Opposition
to Sale of Property
What's
New
Corrupt
Los Angeles Rent Control
City
LA Civil Rights Lawsuit re Hi Point Apts
Racism
in America
Inside
the Law Firm
California
EDD Corruption
 
 




Appeal of EDD Decision


FEBRUARY 5 , 2021

CUIAB
9800 S La Cienega Blvd Suite 901 Inglewood CA 90301

Via FACSIMILE 310-337-4392

Commentary and documents for Hearing February 11, 2021

Case 6688875 (Fed -Ed) Case 6688874 (PUA)

FED - ED

The record shows that I never appealed initially from the Fed-Ed decision. Subsequently I did write that the EDD has no authority to commit fraud by denying a claim saying I had submitted a claim, which I did not submit the Fed-Ed claim. See October 20, 2020 letter package received by the CUIAB on October 21, 2020.18 USC section 1001.

 

PUA

The CSUIB appeal notice states the issue to be considered is:

"Is the claimant excluded as a covered individual as the unemployment, partial unemployment, or inability to or unavailability for work began prior to January 27, 2020."

THE ANSWER:

No. The EDD issued award May 27, 2020 of the PEUC compensation. I was awarded $3,133 because as a covered individual as the unemployment, partial unemployment, or inability to or unavailability for work began after January 27, 2020. The EDD issued a second award to me by letter dated August 10, 2020 awarding me PUA monies of $167 weekly benefit amount because as a covered individual as the unemployment, partial unemployment, or inability to or unavailability for work began after January 27, 2020.

Without waiving that above argument, I elaborate: Certainly res judicata should apply here because the EDD awarded me monies twice (but never paid the PUA monies) saying in writing that my unemployment was caused by a major disaster. The matter was already decided by EDD decision. Further:

  • *  The Fed-Ed and PUA claims filed by the EDD in my name, were filed more than a week after the January 27, 2020 date of the major disaster.

  • *  Based on the EDD undated denial letter for the PUA, it used Public Law section 116-136 section 2102 (a) (2) as well as CFR section 625.5 ( c ). Read together. The Public law section (quoted below) simply establishes the date of the major disaster (COVID-19) as January 27, 2020.

  • *  The next law the EDD uses is CFR which details (below) three results of the direct result of the major disaster: (sic) physical damage or destruction, closure by the government making the workplace inaccessible i.e stay at home orders and quarantines, and entity closed by the government. In this case, all of this would apply to me except for physical destruction.

  • *  CFR 625.2 (f) below establishes (f) Disaster Assistance Period means the period beginning with the first week following the date the major disaster began, and ending with the 26th week subsequent to the date the major disaster was declared. Thus the disaster relief is not limited to the week or two of the major disaster.

  • *  CFR 625.5 (a) establishes "(1) The individual has a "week of unemployment" as defined in § 625.2(w)(1) following the "date the major disaster began" as defined in § 625.2(e), and such unemployment is a direct result of the major disaster; or (2) The individual is unable to reach the place of employment as a direct result of the major disaster...." . This applies in my case because a week after January 27, 2020, I had a week of unemployment after the major disaster began (Governor Newsom began the disaster on March 8, 2020), and I was unable to reach my place of employment (or any place of employment) as a direct result of the major disaster.

  • *  The major disaster was not a one time event that lasted for a few hours. The major disaster is still with us and certainly was with us and affecting me by May 2020 when I was awarded stated COVID relief PEUC monies; the major disaster was still here when I was awarded PUA monies by August 10, 2020.

  • *  The sole purpose of the CARES act (Public Law 116-136) section as quoted by the EDD is to establish a date as to when the government could have authority over major disaster relief. As indicated by the EDD, it is another law, CFR, that establishes the details of how relief is to be applied to the unemployed and what date that unemployment starts, i.e a week after the disaster has been declared. There is no indication in either of the laws quoted that the EDD has the authority to question or rule on any events that occurred before January 27, 2020, because simply the CFR only gives the EDD authority on unemployment that occurs one week after the major disaster has occurred.

  • *  After July 2020, I continued to certify to EDD online of the effect on me of the direct results of the major disaster. 20 CFR section 625.5(a) and 625.5 ( c ) (2) and (3).

    Sincerely,

 

Geary J. Johnson [Signed]

Public Law section 116-136 SEC. 2102.

PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE. (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: (1) COVID–19.—The term ‘‘COVID–19’’ means the 2019 Novel Coronavirus or 2019-nCoV. (2) COVID–19 PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY.—The term ‘‘COVID–19 public health emergency’’ means the public health emergency declared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services on January 27, 2020, with respect to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus.

This section above addresses when the emergency declared.
The below section addresses what happened one

week after the emergency and its affect.

In no instance does the Public Law or CFR authorize the EDD to go back and make decisions based on an applicant’s unemployment status before January 27, 2020. The CFR is only concerned with the status of the unemployed and the disaster one week after the disaster.

CFR § 625.5 Unemployment caused by a major disaster. (a) Unemployed worker. The unemployment of an unemployed worker is caused by a major disaster if -

(1) The individual has a "week of unemployment" as defined in § 625.2(w)(1) following the "date the major disaster began" as defined in § 625.2(e), and such unemployment is a direct result of the major disaster; or

(2) The individual is unable to reach the place of employment as a direct result of the major disaster; or

(3) The individual was to commence employment and does not have a job or is unable to reach the job as a direct result of
the
major disaster; or

(4) The individual has become the breadwinner or major support for a household because the head of the household has died as a direct result of the major disaster; or

(5) The individual cannot work because of an injury caused as a direct result of the major disaster.

CFR 625.5 ( c )

(c) Unemployment is a direct result of the major
disaster.
For the purposes of paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) of this section, a worker's or self-employed individual's unemployment is a direct result of the major disaster where the unemployment is an immediate result of the major disaster itself, and not the result of a longer chain of events precipitated or exacerbated by the disaster. Such an individual's unemployment is a direct result of the major disaster if the unemployment resulted from:

(1) The physical damage or destruction of the place of employment;

*(2) The physical inaccessibility of the place of employment in the major disaster area due to its closure by or at the request of the federal, state or local government, in immediate response to the disaster; or

(3) Lack of work, or loss of revenues, provided that, prior to the disaster, the employer, or the business in the case of a self- employed individual, received at least a majority of its revenue or income from an entity in the major disaster area that was either damaged or destroyed in the disaster, or an entity in
the
major disaster area closed by the federal, state or local government in immediate response to the disaster.

*Government issued stay at home order.

2/5/21 Page 5 of 6 Johnson to CSUIB

CFR 625.2

(w) Week of unemployment means -

(1) For an unemployed worker, any week during which the individual is totally, part-totally, or partially unemployed. A week of total unemployment is a week during which the individual performs no work and earns no wages, or has less than full-time work and earns wages not exceeding the minimum earnings allowance prescribed in the applicable State law. A week of part-total unemployment is a week of otherwise total unemployment during which the individual has odd jobs or subsidiary work and earns wages not exceeding the

maximum earnings allowance prescribed in the applicable State law. A week of partial unemployment is a week during which the individual works less than regular, full-time hours for the individual's regular employer, as a direct result of the major disaster, and earns wages not exceeding the

maximum earnings allowance prescribed by the applicable State law.

(e) Date the major disaster began means the date a major disaster first occurred, as specified in the understanding between the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Governor of the State in which the major disaster occurred.

(f) Disaster Assistance Period means the period beginning with the first week following the date the major disaster began, and ending with the 26th week subsequent to the date the major disaster was declared.

(Editor Note: This letter was submitted to the CUIAB as part of the appeal package.)

 





Fraud and corruption at

Governor Newsom's

California Employment Development Department

When is a PUA award letter not an award letter?

 

 


Kamlager misleads public on purpose of PUA award letter

 

Re: From the Office of Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager

 

From: G Johnson (email redacted)  

To: assemblymember.kamlager@assembly.ca.gov

Date: Friday, December 11, 2020, 01:37 PM PST

 

Dear Assemblymember:

 

I hope you don't continue to try to put words in my mouth. That would not be very ladylike.

 

This is a matter of Public Interest.

 

You say that you are pleased to serve me, but I appreciate your help, but for reasons below I call it a "disservice".

 

You speak of the EDD disqualification and claim "you understood the disqualification"; that is not true. I spoke with Jorge yesterday who claimed he worked for the EDD, and not only did I not understand the disqulaification as I told him, I told him I disagreed with it and that it is under appeal and that I hope to take it to the Supreme Court if I have to.

 

Jorge admitted that the actions of the EDD did not comply with 20 CFR section 625.5.

 

Your email to me speaks of disqualification but never mentions the letter award from EDD stating that I qualfied and was awarded the PUA monies. That is a serious misrepresentation on your part because I sent/mentioned to you many times the PUA qualification award letter, so I imagine for purposes of fraud on the Public you now conveniently in your email ignore the PUA award letter.

 

I would like you to refer this matter to the appropriate California legislative oversight committee for the EDD. I would also like you to refer this matter to any department that is investigating fraud on the part of EDD employees.

 

Even though you try to sweep it under the rug as a government employee, you cannot deny the fact that I was issued a PUA denial letter, then a few days later I was issued a PUA award letter. I have been on unemployment before and each time I was either issued an award letter or denied. Once the award letter is issued, the only next step is for me to certify on a two week basis; there are no other steps once the award letter is issued.

 

However yourself and the EDD Jorge and others claim that the PUA award letter is not actually an award letter. Jorge said to me that the PUA Award letter was "not a final decision"; I disagreed with him and asked what would make it "final". He did not respond. Then he said that they have to approve the PUA money before they can take it away and deny it. Kamlager, what kind of bull is this that I have never heard before? Why would EDD approve something so they can deny it, when you could just deny it in the first place? Jorge said  he could not be responsible for when and how letters are mailed out by EDD; well, if he is not responsible, then who is? If he is not a responsible employee, then he should be terminated from employment.

 

I also questioned Jorge's reading of 20 CFR section 625.5 which is what the EDD used to deny me. Jorge quoted words that were not in the law code and said we were interpreting  it differently; I told him he was lying because the words he quoted do not appear int he code, i.e that he is not comprehending English.

 

Kamlager, you do agree with the EDD lie, don't you?

 

I agree that the PUA award was contingent on me certifying, but for thousands of California unemployed like myself, the EDD PUA award letter is considered to be a final decision from my experience. Don't you agree, Kamlager? Jorge said that the PUA award letter was not a final decision. I disagree because the PUA award letter states it is a final decision. If Jorge was correct, or the decision was pending, then the letter would say so, but Jorge and yourself are NOT CORRECT as the PUA award letter does not say it is "pending". How can Jorge be a EDD legislative assistant and cannot read English? How many others unemployed were told this lie, Kamlager?

 

I provide further notes below:

 

By August 1, 2020 I was still suffering the lack of employment as a direct result of COVID-19.

 

I was not allowed by EDD to file an application for the PUA, for one reason I had an open claim. If EDD claims they filed a Fed Ed and PUA application on my behalf, they would have filed it after January 27, 2020, which such application would have qualified me for the PUA award simply because it occurs as a direct and immediate result of the major disaster. The fact is that EDD filed the PUA application on my behalf at least a week after January 27, 2020 since I was still collecting unemployment by the end of April and then extended benefits into July, and EDD said it would file the application after the July unemployment payments ended.

 

If the EDD denial letter claims I applied (they applied) for unemployment based on events prior to 12/31/19, this would be a false statement because I could not possibly file a second claim based on 12/31/19. If EDD filed the application around July 2020, it could not have been based on 12/31/19 since that claim was already open. If EDD filed a PUA application on my behalf in July 2020, it had to be based on the direct and immediate result of the major disaster.

 

The record shows that I did self certify numerous times (attached) after August 2020 that my unemployment then was a direct and immediate result of a major disaster. See attached certification dated 10/11/20. I self certified during the month of August, September, and parts of October. My self certifications show that I was unemployed as a direct and immediate result of the major disaster COVID-19.

 

There is no authority for the EDD under 20 CFR section 625.5 to disqualify me from PUA based on the fact I previously qualified for unemployment benefits prior to January 27, 2020.  The only requirements under 20 CFR section 625.5 is that I had to be unemployed a week after the major disaster of January 27, 2020, which I was, and that by August 1, 2020, I was as a direct and immediate result of the major disaster and quarantine, unable to reach the place of employment, unable to reach the job, my employment positions/businesses were closed at the request of the federal, state, or local governments, or did not have a job.

 

The EDD is further without authority to deny me PUA benefits on August 1, 2020 based on a false claim application they fabricated based on the fact I was unemployed as of 12/31/20. What happened on 12/31/19 has no relevance to what was happening to me between January 28, 2020 and August 1, 2020.

 

 

All rights reserved.

 

Geary "G" Juan Johnson

(address redacted)

Los Angeles  CA   90035

Phone (redacted)

 

cc: Assembly Member Ash Kalra,

Chair of the Committee on Labor and Employment

Assembly Member Heath Flora,

Vice Chair of the Committee on Labor and Employment

916.319.2191 fax






| Return Home | Rep Karen Bass re Hyundai | Opposition to Sale of Property | What's New | Corrupt Los Angeles Rent Control | City LA Civil Rights Lawsuit re Hi Point Apts | Racism in America | Inside the Law Firm | California EDD Corruption |
 
 



Copyright © 2021, attorney-ethics-elderly-abuse.com. All rights reserved.