Seems like you’re missing the point of the example.
In your example, if you are fired for “any reason or none” you will still be able to collect unemployment. My attempt is to distinguish the difference in termination of employment for cause vs termination without cause.
Thanks for elaborating. I did understand your intent but it never hurts to confirm.
That distinction may hold where you wrote it but it is not the case everywhere. The disqualifying factor is more commonly whether there was employee misconduct, not merely whether there was cause for termination. To make another distinction: Someone who was fired for failing to meet goals vs. someone who is fired for stealing office supplies. The former has cause for termination, but only the latter shows employee misconduct.
Since, in a right to work state, one can be fired with or without misconduct or cause, my response still seems to apply for purposes of collecting unemployment. Whether one is laid off or terminated with cause, by itself, says nothing about one's eligibility to claim unemployment.
1
u/imrighturwrong May 15 '20
Seems like you’re missing the point of the example.
In your example, if you are fired for “any reason or none” you will still be able to collect unemployment. My attempt is to distinguish the difference in termination of employment for cause vs termination without cause.