Deborah Wemette v. Director, Division of Workforce Services ( 2023 )

Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 367ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. E-22-305
Opinion Delivered September 6, 2023
DEBORAH WEMETTE
APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS BOARD
OF REVIEW
V. [NO. 2021-BR-05054]
DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
WORKFORCE SERVICES AFFIRMED IN PART;
APPELLEE REMANDED IN PART
STEPHANIE POTTER BARRETT, Judge
Appellant Deborah Wemette appeals the Arkansas Board of Review’s May 2, 2022
findings that granted her request to backdate her unemployment claim but limited her award
to a period of fourteen days. We affirm in part and remand in part for further findings.
Wemette owns her own business and was self-employed in 2020 when the COVID
epidemic struck the United States. Wemette filed for unemployment benefits, and on April
22, 2020, she received a notice of monetary determination denying her benefits because she
did not have sufficient monetary wages to establish a claim. Wemette had filed and received
pandemic unemployment assistance (PUA) benefits after her denial of unemployment
benefits until the PUA funding expired in December 2020. While receiving PUA benefits,
Wemette received a second notice of monetary determination on June 5, 2020, that she was
eligible for regular unemployment benefits in the sum of $115 a week.
In late December 2020, Wemette was locked out of her PUA benefits because PUA
funds were depleted. On February 1, 2021, Wemette could log into her account. On
February 11, 2021, she was instructed by letter to download state-issued identification, which
she did on February 22, 2021. Wemette stated the department was not allowing anyone into
the building, but she presented the identification to an employee who came to the door and
took her identification and copied it. As a result, Wemette was not allowed to speak to
anyone regarding her case. Wemette downloaded her work proof as requested. Wemette
attempted to communicate with the PUA unit to obtain further benefits and reapplied for
PUA benefits. Eventually, the PUA unit sent her a letter on March 10, 2021, advising her
she may be eligible for regular unemployment benefits and that she needed a recent regular-
benefit determination for her reapplication for PUA benefits. Thus, Wemette filed an
application for regular benefits and asked that it be backdated to December 27, 2020.
The Division of Workforce Services issued a “Notice of Agency Determination” to
Wemette on August 6, 2021, denying her claim for unemployment benefits under Ark. Code
Ann. § 11-10-507(1) (Supp. 2023) and Regulation 14(b) of the Division for failure to show
good cause for delay in filing for unemployment benefits. Wemette filed a timely appeal of
this decision to the Appeal Tribunal, which conducted a telephone hearing on September
20, 2021. The Tribunal mailed a written decision on October 5, 2021, affirming the
Division of Workforce Services’ determination. Wemette filed a timely appeal to the Board
of Review.
2
The Board reversed the Tribunal in its decision mailed on May 2, 2022, finding in
cases of backdating requests the claimant must show by a preponderance of the evidence that
she had good cause for the delay. Claims may only be backdated no earlier than fourteen
days prior to the date that the claim was filed. See 003.20.2 Ark. Admin. Code § 14(b)(G)
(WL current with amendments received through July 15, 2023). In this case, the Board
found that Wemette credibly testified that she delayed filing a claim for regular UI benefits
because she did not believe she was eligible because the Division previously determined that
she did not have sufficient wages to monetarily establish a claim. The Board recognized that
Wemette referred to the monetary determination issued on April 22, 2020. The Board
noted that the Division issued a monetary determination on June 5, 2020, which shows that
Wemette could monetarily establish a claim for regular UI benefits. However, the Board
stated it could see how that determination could cause Wemette confusion considering the
PUA unit did not stop releasing PUA benefits to her after June 5, 2020. As Wemette
believed she was ineligible for regular UI benefits and continued to pursue PUA benefits
until she was notified of her regular UI eligibility on March 1, 2021, the Board found that
Wemette presented sufficient evidence to establish that she had good cause to delay filing
her claim for total unemployment. The Board found that a claim may be backdated no
earlier than fourteen days prior to the claim’s filing. As Wemette’s initial claim was filed on
March 25, 2021, her initial claim could be backdated no earlier than March 11, 2021.
Therefore, the Board found the Tribunal decision that Wemette did not have good cause to
delay in filing a claim for total unemployment under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-10-507(1) and
3
Regulation No. 14(b) should be reversed. The Board found Wemette’s claim for total
unemployment shall be considered filed effective March 11, 2021.
On appeal of an unemployment-compensation case, we review the evidence and all
reasonable inferences deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the Board’s
findings. Jones v. Dir., 2019 Ark. App. 341, 581 S.W.3d 516. The Board’s findings of fact
are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. Id. Substantial evidence is evidence a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Id. Appellate review is
limited to determining whether the Board could reasonably reach its decision based on the
evidence before it, even if there is evidence on which the Board might have reached a
different decision. Higgins v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 449, 503 S.W.3d 833. The credibility of
witnesses and the weight to be accorded their testimony are matters to be resolved by the
Board. Id.In this case, the Board specifically found that Wemette had good cause for delay in
filing for total unemployment but limited itself to the provisions of 003.20.2 Ark. Admin.
Code § 14(b)(G), which limits the backdating of a claim showing good cause to fourteen
days.
To be eligible for weekly benefits, a claimant must comply with Arkansas Code
Annotated section 11-10-507 and Department of Workforce Services regulations. Requests
for backdating claims is addressed in Regulation 14(b):
(G) An initial, additional, reopened or continued claim, if filed either by telephone,
electronically via the Internet or, in person, shall be considered to have been filed on
the date it is received by the Agency. If mailed, such claim shall be considered to have
4
been filed on the date of its postmark. Except that, if it is determined by the Agency that
a delay in the filing or any claim was due to good cause, it may be considered to have been filed
on a date no earlier than fourteen (14) days prior to the date the claim, if filed in person, by
telephone, or electronically via the Internet was received by the Agency or, if filed by
mail, was postmarked. Provided however, the Director at his discretion may waive the
restrictions in this Paragraph (G) if he finds that extraordinary circumstances exist and equity
and justice require such waiver. All such waivers shall be reported to the Employment
Security Department Advisory Council.
003.20.2 Ark. Admin. Code § 14(b)(G) (emphasis added).
In this case, there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision to allow
backdating of Wemette’s claims. The Board found that Wemette relied on erroneous agency
advice to her detriment and thereby showed good cause for her delay in filing for her total
unemployment benefits. See Johnson v. Dir., 2023 Ark. App. 298. Here, as in Johnson, the
record lacks findings on whether extraordinary circumstances exist and whether equity and
justice require a further waiver for backdating beyond fourteen days, as claimed by Wemette
and contemplated by the regulation. Therefore, we remand to the Board for findings in
accordance with Regulation 14(b)(G).
We affirm the Board of Review’s decision backdating Wemette’s claim for
unemployment benefits, but we remand for consideration by the Director of whether there
were extraordinary circumstances that existed and whether equity and justices require the
further waiver of backdating beyond fourteen days.
Affirmed in part; remanded in part.
GLADWIN and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Deborah Wemette, pro se appellant.
5
Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, Associate General Counsel, for appellee.
6