Tag Archives: unemployment

How to Apply for Unemployment while Workers’ Comp Is Denied

Posted on by

As we have blogged before, it is possible to receive unemployment benefits, even though you are off of work because of a workplace injury. . You do not have to be fired to qualify for unemployment benefits. You can get unemployment benefits if you quit for good cause.

One good cause is if you quit because you are not physcially able to do your job. For example, if your work comp claim has been denied, but you have work restrictions that your employer is not accommodating, you can qualify for unemployment benefits.

When I explain this to my client, the question I often receive is how to actually apply for those unemployment benefits. Below is a list of steps:

1.You must be able and willing to work. Often, you will have work restrictions from your doctor when you are injured. Your employer may not allow you to work within those restrictions. If your work comp claim is denied, and your employer won’t accommodate your restrictions, you may apply for unemployment benefits. You must represent that you are able to work (within your restrictions). You cannot qualify for unemployment if your doctor takes you off of work completely. 

2.To apply online, follow the link at NEworks.nebraska.gov to file an application. You will be required to upload a resume and job-search information. If you do not have access to the internet, you may visit a local Job Center at the following locations listed here: https://www.dol.nebraska.gov/Home/AboutUs. Somehow, you must find a way to get internet access because you will need to post your resume online. If you cannot get to a Job Center, check with your local library. Slow internet speed hindering unemployment claims is a problem in rural areas in Nebraska and across the nation.

3. Have the following information ready to complete an application:

  1. Social Security Number
  2. Complete home mailing address, including ZIP code
  3. Telephone number
  4. Email address
  5. County you live in
  6. Driver’s license number or State ID card number
  7. If you select direct deposit, your bank routing number and account number
  8. The company names for all your employers from the past 18 months as they appear on your paycheck stubs or W-2 forms
  9. Complete mailing addresses of employers, including ZIP code and the city in which the business is physically located
  10. Your start and end dates with each employer, including month, day, and year
  11. Your reason for leaving each employer (lack of work, voluntary quit, discharge, leave of absence)
  12. Employment authorization number and expiration date (if a non-citizen)
  13. If you served in the military the past 18 months, DD 214 Member #4 Form

 

4.Communicate with the Nebraska Department of Labor. Often times someone from the Nebraska Department of Labor will call you to ask questions. These questions are often prompted by infornation submitted by your employer Make sure you answer take that call. We wrote a blog back in 2012 where a Nebraska Department of Labor employee said that many unemployed workers would get benefits if they would just answer their phone whwen  the NDOL calls. After you file a new claim for unemployment benefits, you must file a weekly claim for benefits.

5. If your claim is denied, or you are told that you are disqualified from benefits for a certain period of time, you may file an appeal, but the appeal must be filed within 20 calendar days from the date the determination was mailed. You can file an appeal online at neworks.nebraska.gov, in writing by mail, by fax at 402-471-1734), or by email (NDOL.Appeals@nebraska.gov). If filing an appeal by mail, send to: Nebraska Appeal Tribunal, Nebraska Department of Labor, PO Box 98941, Lincoln, NE 68509. If your appeal is in writing, you must state the reason you wish to appeal, and include your signature, Social Security Number and employer’s name. Include the Determination ID from your determination letter.

If you are unsure how to file an appeal, contact a lawyer or someone at our firm.  The Nebraska Department of Labor tries to schedule hearings within a few weeks of an appeal date. While that might seem like a lifetime when you aren’t receiving benefits, it isn’t a lot of time for a lawyer to get prepared for a hearing.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Nebraska, Unemployment, Workers' Compensation and tagged .

Bill would expand job search exemption for laid off workers receiving unemployment

Posted on by

Some employers don’t want their laid off employees looking for work

Some unemployed workers could be exempted from job search requirements under the Nebraska Employment Security Act if a bill being considered by the Nebraska legislature passes.

LB 428 introduced by State Senator Curt Friesen, would give the Commissioner of Labor the authority to exempt some workers on highway and street construction jobs from job searches as a condition of receiving unemployment benefits. The bill would expand the exemption from job search requirements for workers on layoffs who have an expectation of returning to work.

Nebraska requires laid off workers to make five job search contacts per week and one contact a day as  a condition for receiving unemployment benefits. Businesses support the reduction in unemployment taxes  brought about by policies such as tough job search requirements. But those job search requirements have had unintended consequences.

In another state with robust job search requirements for unemployed workers, Wisconsin, many employers in the construction industry complained about the job search requirements. They argued that the job search requirements made it harder to retain employees who traditionally collect unemployment benefits while being laid off over the winter.

Requiring workers on a seasonal layoff to look for work gives other employers the chance to “recruit” employees. Construction employers in Nebraska frequently complain of a worker shortage, so employee turnover encouraged by job search requirements would make that problem worse.

If you spend any time reading HR Twitter you know that “talent” recruitment and retention is frequently discussed. Setting aside the obvious solution of increasing wages, HR folks like to talk about creative ways to retain employees. Hence perks like ping pong tables in break rooms and casual dress codes.

Traditionally employers were usually the only way to obtain good health insurance, so workers stay in their  jobs to keep their health insurance even if the working conditions are poor.

There are also more coercive talent “retention” tactics such as non-compete agreements that are being increasingly absued by employers to the point that even some Republicans  are introducing bills to address the issue on a federal level.

In addition to reducing taxes, tough job search requirements are supposed to increase the size of the labor market by discouraging receiving unemployment benefits. But policies that may benefit business interests as a whole, like job search requirements to receive unemployment benefits, may not benefit particular employers who may struggle to hold onto valuable employees.

 

 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Nebraska, Unemployment and tagged , , , .

Indefinite suspensions are employer ghosting

Posted on by

True fact stated: Millennials didn’t invent workplace “ghosting”

Employee “ghosting”, or employees quitting without notice, has been a hot topic among HR “influencers”. This trend seems to be blamed on the usual suspects of millennials and the internet.

But more thoughtful commentators have argued employers bear some of the blame for employee behavior through harsh application of employment at-will. One particularly nasty example of employer “ghosting” is the indefinite suspension.

This form of employer ghosting is well-established enough that the Nebraska Department of Labor presumes that an indefinite, involuntary suspension is a termination for the purpose of an unemployment appeal. As I’ve stated in previous posts, an employee who is terminated should have an easier time in getting unemployment benefits because they employer has to prove the employee was fired for misconduct in connection with work.

Unfortunately, there isn’t a hard and fast rule about how long of a suspension constitutes a termination. I believe it would be prudent to ask how long the suspension is supposed to last. I also think that an employee should check in with their employer about the status of investigation during a suspension. By taking these steps the employee shows that they didn’t intend to end the employment relationship, but that the employers lack of communication forced their hand.

Once an employee has filed for unemployment, the employer is forced to provide a reason and some evidence about if and how the employment relationship came to an end. If the employer doesn’t do this and the employee can show they were let go not to due to misconduct, they employee generally gets unemployment benefits. Unemployment appeal hearings also give employees some opportunity to investigate and question their employer about the reason for their termination. This information can sometimes be helpful in other employment-related cases like workers’ compensation or discrimination claims.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Nebraska, Unemployment and tagged , , , , .

A new season for the Shameless economy?

Posted on by

What’s going to happen on the next season of the Shameless economy?

Amazon made big news on Tuesday when it announced it was implementing a $15 minimum wage for all employees. 

Part of the story was why Amazon raised wages. Some pointed to low unemployment  while others pointed to popular criticism of Amazon’s labor practices. That criticism was expemplied by the Stop BEZOS Act targeting Amezon that was introducted in the Senate by Bernie Sanders.

The author of this blog falls into Amazon critics category. Last November I coined the phrase “Shameless” economy, based on the show Shameless, to describe how Amazon misclassifisied delivery dirvers as contractors.

While Amazon may win applause for raising the wages of employees, by classifiying workers as contractors they are excluding those workers from the benefits of emplyoees like unemployment and workers’ compensation. Amazon annouced this summer that it was expanding its own inhouse package delivery services and looking to contract  with “entrreprenuers”. Contractors aren’t covered by unemployment or workers’ compensation which are beneifts that are mandated by the government.  In other words, Amazon is growing its ranks of contractors which reduces its labor costs while receiving good publicity for raising wages for workers they classify as employees. 

If you watch Shameless you know the character Frank Gallagher. Frank is a terrible drunk and overall person. But occassionally Frank will seem to get his stuff in order only to fall back into his usual antics. Amazon’s labor practices are like Frank Gallagher’s behavior, every once in awhile he will get his stuff together and demand all sorts of credit. But sooner or later, as the millenials say on social media, he is back on his bulls***.

Keep an eye on Amazon.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Amazon, worker classification, Workers' Compensation and tagged , , , , , .

The case against “Ghosting” for employees

Posted on by

Employers are increasingly complaining of employees “ghosting” or leaving suddenly without notice. Temple Law Professor and author Brishen Rogers correctly pointed out on Twitter that employee ghosting is protected the by the 13th Amendment prohibition of slavery. Other commentators have pointed out that employers have been “ghosting” employees for many years and that some turnabout is to be expected as unemployment declines.

Employee “ghosting” is also the flip side of employment at-will. Employers are free to fire you at any time, but you are free to quit your job at any time without notice.

The concept of giving notice before quitting isn’t rooted in any legal requirement. But giving notice before leaving a job can give employees some legal benefits. Providing written notice can provide more protections to employees if done correctly.

Unemployment

In Nebraska, if you quit your job you have to prove you had good cause for the quit to get full unemployment benefits, whereas if you are fired your employer has to prove you committed misconduct in connection with your employment to deny you full benefits. Often when an employee gives two weeks’ notice, an employer will have them stop working before the two week notice period ends. In this situation an employee, for the purposes of unemployment benefits, has been fired. So unless the employer can prove the employee committed some misconduct, then they will receive full unemployment benefits.

Putting notice in writing can be helpful because it explains why you are leaving. Under Nebraska law, there are several reasons deemed by good cause for leaving. Having one of those reasons in a letter could help you receive unemployment benefits sooner.

I recently had an employee who was asked to submit a resignation letter due to alleged concerns about her job performance. My client was smart enough to write down that she would retract her resignation if performance improved. My client ended up winning her unemployment appeal due in part to that letter as it wasn’t clear that she really intended to resign.

Other employment laws

Written notice can also help in other cases. If an employee resigns due to workplace harassment, written notice of a quit would put an employer on notice of the harassment if it wasn’t done so already. Adding in that the resignation would be retracted if the harassment was addressed would also help.

A written notice that an employee is quitting because of a medical condition could prompt an attempt to accommodate that condition under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  I have seen written notice of quits because of medical conditions be helpful in winning benefits in workers’ compensation cases as well.

Giving notice is also helpful to an employee quits a new job for a new job that falls through. Courtesy can help an employee maintain a relationship with an employer and make it easier for an employee to go back to a job.

 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in ADA, Harassment, Nebraska, Unemployment, Workers Compensation and tagged , , , , , , .

Immigration, SEC cases send mixed signals from Supreme Court

Posted on by

Like Justice Stephen Breyer, many of us have pained looks when thinking about the Supreme Court this week

In a case with implications beyond securities law, the Supreme Court ruled in Lucia v. SEC  last week that an investment adviser convicted of securities fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was unconstitutionally convicted because the Administrative Law Judge (ALJs) who tried his case was hired rather than appointed in violation of the appointments clause

Lucia is not a high-profile case like Tuesday’s decsion in Trump v. Hawaii that upheld the so-called Muslim ban. To some extent the cases may seem contradictary. But the cases can be reconciled in a way that reveals some disturbing truths about the American political system. While Lucia is an important case in its own right, it makes Trump v. Hawaii more understandable.

In January 2017, I wrote about how a companion case to Lucia could potentially wreak havoc with Social Security Disability (SSDI) cases.  Like the SEC, the Social Security Administration appoints administrative law judges to adjudicate social security disability claims. ALJs are government employees who are hired by agency rather than appointed by the President or agency head. The Supreme Court held that since ALJs at the SEC had significant discretion in deciding important matters they were officers for the sake of the appointments clause so they needed to be appointed rather than hired as employees.

SSDI hearings may be distinguishable from SEC hearings in that they are less formal and less adversarial. A parrty challenging the constituionality of SSDI on appointments clause grounds might have a hard time showing they had standing to make a challenge. But other forms of administrative  hearings are more formal and adversarial and involve parties with standing to make challenges.

In Nebraska, the Department of Labor hires ALJs to hear unemployment appeals. In many states, like Iowa, workers’ compensation cases are heard by ALJsthat are hired as civil servants rather than appointed by the Executive. SEC v. Lucia could help employers/insurers to make persuasive appointments clause arguments under state constitutions  that such arrangements are unconstitutional. Employees/plaintiffs have had a recent string of good decisions with state supreme courts challenngng laws they believe harm workers. Employers may decide to press their luck in the states with Lucia case as persuassive authority. The same challenges based on Lucia could conceivably be made about unemployment insurance at a state level.

Finally there was some irony in Lucia. Though ALJs hired by the SEC could only make recommendations to the commission, the court found that the commission usually deferred to the recommendation of the ALJ which was part of the reason why the ALJ was an officer rather than an employee. In Masterpiece Cakeshop an ALJ had decided that bakery had violated Colorado public accommodation laws in refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. The comments made by the Colorado civil rights commissioner that caused the decision to be reversed by the court were made after the ALJ’s decision.  But in Masterpiece the argument that the commission was probably just deferring to an ALJ decision was absent. But Masterpiece and Lucia can be somewhat reconciled logically as they both show how the Roberts court is skeptical of administrative agencies when they interpret laws and adjudicate disputes.

In his dissent in Lucia, Justice Stephen Breyer stated the Supreme Court threatened to undermine the whole system of administrative adjudication with its decision.  The most high profile of these administrative systems is the Immigration Court which is backlogged with cases. President Trump proposed “solving” the backlog of cases by just doing away with due process altogether in deportation hearings.But if four-flushers and  flim-flam men deserve  due process in administrative hearings, then so do those accused of either entering or living in the United States without authorization.

The skepticism shown by the Roberts court towards admisnisative agencies that regulate the economy was absent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other intelligence agencies in Trump v. Hawaii. Instead the Roberts court was beyond deferential to the Executive branch in a matter they deemed to be “national security.” To those raised during  the Cold War and post-9/11 era such deference to the executive on matters of national security seems natural. But as Justice Sotomayor poitned out in her dissent, the Judiciary, Legislative and Executive are equal branches of the government.

But are the branches of the government are equal when the Executuve commands a massive standing army and massive foreign and domestic intellignece agencies? The power of the Executive in this area is even greater when combined with business interests that former President Dwight Eisenhower described as the military-industrial complex in 1961.  William Jennings Bryan made a similar warning in 1900 in what was called his “Imperalism” speech. The corrosivve effects of the military-industrial complex or empire on our democratic form of government can be seen in how the Roberts court was willing to kow-tow to the Trump administration on matters of “national security” while the corut is more than willing to second guess Congress and administtrative agencies on matters relating to regulation of the economy.

 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Constitutional law, social security disability, Unemployment, Workers Compensation and tagged , , , , , .

What the big California worker classification case means and could mean

Posted on by

The California Supreme Court made big news in the world of workers’ compensation and employment law last week when it adopted the employee-friendly ABC Test  for the purposes of California’s minimum wage law. The decision was seen as a set back for gig economy companies like Uber who classify their workers as independent contractors. 

The bigger story as pointed out by CNN Money reporter, Lydia DePillis , and widely acknowledged by attorneys and legal academics is the patchwork of different state labor laws and how they will impact the gig economy and workers. My room temperature take is that employee classification laws aren’t even consistent within states. Nebraska has adopted the ABC test for the purposes of unemployment and for our wage payment act by statute. But Nebraska imposes the more employer-friendly right of control/economic reality test by case law for the purposes of workers compensation.

Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta has called for an update of labor and employment laws to aid the gig economy. Experienced workers’ compensation attorneys may view the fight over the classification of gig economy workers as a potential threat to their practices but as essentially an old issue that has new prominence because of the rise of companies like Uber. But worker classification legislation is only part of the story about how the rise of the gig economy could change workers’ compensation laws. Advocates for injured workers need to understand how so-called “portable benefit” schemes could change workers’ compensation laws. If enacted, portable benefits laws could radically alter the grand bargain behind workers’ compensation laws. They could also provide more uniformity of laws regarding employee benefits and protections like workers’ compensation

A portable benefit is defined as a benefit that is paid into an employer-sponsored plan that can be transferred to a new employer or to an individual who is leaving the workplace.[At least when it comes to health insurance, portability has some real benefits for workers’ rights. Employees aren’t tied to a potentially abusive employer just for the sake of keeping their health insurance. Candidly any portable benefits scheme that expands health insurance coverage would also help workers who do not have health insurance. The pro-worker potential of portable benefits was recognized by the National Employment Law Project who issued a report with the Roosevelt Institute about how portable benefits could be implemented.

But other portable benefit plans developed by Washington D.C. think tanks run the gamut from the really bad to the just bad.

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who was influential in the design of the Affordable Care Act, wrote a paper for the Aspen Institute that proposed catch-all individual security and retirement accounts as alternatives or replacements for workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance.  Without anything in the way of attribution, Gruber breezily states that higher workers’ compensation benefit payments create a “moral hazard” which leads to more injuries and longer durations of injuries. Gruber then goes on to propose that injured workers exhaust their individual security accounts before they collect workers’ compensation benefits and that workers’ compensation benefits be subject to federal taxation. It is important to note that Gruber doesn’t limit his proposal for portable benefits to gig economy workers.

Economists Seth Harris and Alan Krueger have proposed a somewhat more worker-friendly portable benefits scheme designed for gig economy workers to be paired with a new type of employee classification between employee and independent contractor for workers in a paper did they did for The Brookings Institute. The Harris-Kruger plan would allow gig economy employers to “opt-in” to state workers’ compensation laws. But even the more worker-friendly Harris-Krueger portable benefits scheme was created mainly to reduce litigation costs for gig economy companies. Former National Labor Relations Board member and associate counsel for the AFL-CIO, Craig Becker, pointed out that creating a new class of workers may create more litigationwhen employers try to re-classify employee as a new class of worker.[5] Becker and others pointed out that this is what happened in Italy when Italy created a third class of worker that was neither employee nor independent contractor. Legislation has been introduced in California that is along the line of the Harris-Krueger plan.

Many plaintiff’s lawyers seem to, or at least want to, believe that since workers’ compensation laws were enacted under 10th Amendment police powers then workers’ compensation laws are a matter of “state’s rights” and so-called federalization is uncalled for and unconstitutional. Congress has broad authority under its taxing power to effect economic activity that is beyond even the broad scope of its power to regulate individual commerce. The individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act was found to be constitutional under congressional taxing authority even though the mandate exceeded congressional authority to regulate interstate commerce. Recently passed changes to tax law have encouraged workers to take independent contractor status.

Besides workers’ compensation, the other mandated benefits that stem from the employee-employer relationship — unemployment, Medicare and Social Security — are all effectuated in whole or in large part through federal taxes. If a portable benefits are implemented on a nationwide basis, it will likely happen through the tax code and they could be enacted in a constitutionally valid way. Any discussion about the impact of the gig economy on worker classification laws should include discussion about portable benefits proposals.


 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Constitutional law, worker classification, Workers Compensation and tagged , , .