Who Should Represent Your Company at an Unemployment Hearing?
The person leading your case isn't always the person who tells the story.
When employers prepare for an unemployment appeal hearing, much of the focus naturally falls on gathering documents, reviewing policies, and organizing the personnel file. Those things are certainly important, but they are only part of the picture.
Another important decision is determining who will represent the employer at the hearing and whether additional witnesses will be needed.
Never assume the best representative is the Human Resources manager, owner, or another member of management simply because of their position within the organization. In many cases, the person representing the employer is not the individual with the strongest firsthand knowledge of the facts.
Understanding the difference can help employers present a more complete and reliable account of what occurred.
The employer's representative is responsible for presenting the employer's case, responding to questions from the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), and guiding the hearing from the employer's perspective. That representative may or may not have firsthand knowledge of every event leading to the separation. When important facts are disputed, the representative may rely on one or more witnesses who personally observed those events.
Representatives and Witnesses Serve Different Roles
ALJs evaluate both the facts being presented and how the witness came to know those facts.
Someone who personally witnessed the events leading to the separation is generally able to provide more reliable testimony than someone who learned about those events by reviewing records or speaking with others afterward. This is commonly referred to as firsthand knowledge.
That doesn’t mean you don’t need evidence to support the separation. However, when the central issue involves what was said, what was done, or what occurred during a specific incident, testimony from the individual who observed those events firsthand is often more persuasive than testimony based solely on secondhand information.
Choosing the Right Witness
Not every hearing requires witness testimony. However, when facts are disputed or credibility becomes an issue, testimony from someone with firsthand knowledge can be extremely important.
The strongest witness is not determined by a job title. It is determined by firsthand knowledge of the facts.
For example, an employee is discharged after backing a company vehicle into the building. There are no security cameras, but the custodian witnessed the accident. Although the custodian has no supervisory authority over the employee, they may be the strongest witness because they can testify to exactly what they observed.
If the separation involved repeated attendance violations, the supervisor or manager responsible for monitoring attendance may be the individual best able to explain the attendance history, prior discussions with the employee, and the events leading to the separation.
If misconduct occurred during a customer interaction, the manager or employee who observed the incident firsthand may be in the best position to describe what happened.
The person most familiar with the events is often the person best equipped to answer questions from the Administrative Law Judge and respond to testimony presented by the claimant.
When Firsthand Witnesses Are Not Available
Not every employer will have the ideal witness available.
Supervisors retire, move to other employers, or become unavailable for a variety of reasons. In some situations, multiple supervisors may have observed different parts of the events leading to the separation. Other cases rely heavily on business records or documentary evidence because no single witness observed every relevant event.
Every unemployment case is different. The absence of firsthand testimony at a hearing does not automatically prevent an employer from prevailing. ALJs consider the entire record, including testimony, documents, and other evidence presented during the hearing.
When firsthand witnesses are available, however, their testimony often helps clarify disputed facts and resolve questions of credibility.
Representative and Witness Expectations
The representative should understand the employer's position, be familiar with the claim file, know which witnesses will testify, and understand the hearing procedures.
Selecting the right witness is only part of the preparation.
Anyone asked to testify should understand the purpose of the hearing and be prepared to answer questions based on what they personally observed. Witnesses should avoid guessing or speculating about events outside of their personal knowledge.
The goal is not to memorize testimony or advocate for a particular outcome. It is simply to provide a truthful, accurate account of the events within the witness's personal knowledge.
A well-prepared witness is often able to explain the facts more clearly and respond more confidently to questions from both the Administrative Law Judge and the opposing party.
The Bigger Picture
Choosing who will represent the employer and deciding who should testify are two separate decisions. The most effective representative understands the employer's position and can present the case effectively. The strongest witness is the person with firsthand knowledge of the facts in dispute.
Selecting the right representative and witnesses, however, is only one part of hearing preparation. How testimony fits together, how evidence supports that testimony, and how credibility is established throughout the hearing can all influence how the facts are ultimately viewed.
Understanding who should participate is an important first step. Knowing how those pieces work together is where many employers discover there's more to an unemployment hearing than they first realized.
Every unemployment claim comes with its own facts, challenges, and circumstances. If this article made you realize there's more to an unemployment claim than you first thought, imagine what you could learn by seeing your claim through the eyes of a former unemployment adjudicator.