Report: Company slows unemployment claims

[The Straight Story]

Report: Company slows unemployment claims


ST. LOUIS, April 4 (UPI) -- A St. Louis company is doing big business helping employers process and unnecessarily fight unemployment claims, critics say.

The client list for the Talx Corp. is like a roster of the Fortune 500 firms, The New York Times reported.

Talx says it handles more than 30 percent of the country's request for jobless benefits, saving employers money by contesting claims and filing appeals of successful claims, the report said. With fewer former employees getting unemployment benefits, a company pays lower unemployment taxes.

Critics say Talx is undermining a crucial safety net and officials in a number of states say Talx repeatedly produces error and delay, the Times said.

"Talx often files appeals regardless of merits," Jonathan P. Baird, a lawyer at New Hampshire Legal Assistance, told the Times. "It's sort of a war of attrition. If you appeal a certain percentage of cases, there are going to be those workers who give up."

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/04/04/Report-Company-slows-unemployment-claims/UPI-59741270392274/

[CoffeeCat]

1. That's disgusting...

...and anti-American.

[jody]

2. How would you fight fraud with unemployment claims OR do you believe there is no fraud?

[SanchoPanza]

3. Fighting fraud?

Automatically rejecting claims does not, in any way, "fight fraud". All it does is force people who cannot afford the legal fees to contest the rejection to abandon their claim. That's the entire purpose.

[jody]

4. I'll take your reply as "there is no fraud with unemployment claims". n/t

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThoughtCriminal]

6. "Talx often files appeals regardless of merits"

How does this help fight fraud? Flooding the system with frivolous challenges makes it harder to fight fraud.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

10. Fraud "Whenever a claimant conceals or misrepresents any eligibility information that can effect

benefits paid you have potential fraud."

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/uiben/f-faq.htm

[azurnoir]

8. So Wisconsin and Iowa support fraud?

This is from the article

Wisconsin and Iowa passed laws to curtail procedural abuses that officials said were common in cases handled by Talx, the report said.

[jody]

14. WI says "Whenever a claimant conceals or misrepresents any eligibility information that can effect

benefits paid you have potential fraud." http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/uiben/f-faq.htm

Perhaps the article should have identified the critics report that it uses as its source so one can judge the credibility of the article.

The article is simply a "she said -- he said" exchange between Jonathan P. Baird, a lawyer at New Hampshire Legal Assistance and Michael E. Smith senior Talx executive.

[azurnoir]

15. So you support this tactic?

saves companies plenty of money huh and that is what's important huh? Puleez the Wisconsin law is standard and really has little to do with the article

[jody]

17. This thread branch started with #1 asserting "disgusting...anti-American" to which I asked CoffeeCat

how she would fight fraud.

Unemployment insurance fraud is a major problem in ever state and I hope state attorney generals will prosecute Talx and any other company that violates the law as well as every claimant who commits fraud.

[ThoughtCriminal]

18. WI considers Talx tactics as abusive.

from the article:
"Wisconsin and Iowa passed laws to curtail procedural abuses that officials said were common in cases handled by Talx"

Do you understand that the procedural abuses were being committed by a company HIRED TO DENY claims?

[jody]

21. Please provide a link to the WI law that does as you claim. n/t

[ThoughtCriminal]

22. Read the article

Good grief. The link is in the OP.

[jody]

23. The article does not identify the law but you are so knowledgeable you must be able to cite the law.

On the other hand you might be just as ignorant of the supposed law as am I. :shrug:

[ThoughtCriminal]

24. You do know how to use Google right?

The article mentions the law specifically. Do you have any links providing contrary information? At this point, it seems like you are just being absurdly contrary.

Here's more:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/us/04talx.html?pagewanted=2

"Wisconsin officials were among the first to complain, passing a law in 2005 to prevent what they called a common Talx practice: failing to respond to requests for information, only to appeal when workers got benefits. That clogged the appeals docket and drained the benefits fund, since money sent to ineligible workers was hard to get back.

While the law brought about quicker participation, said Hal Bergan, the state’s unemployment insurance administrator, the company’s overall speed and accuracy “still leaves something to be desired.”

Indeed, years of e-mail messages, obtained through an open records law, show a continually exasperated Wisconsin staff. While a few cited improved performance, others complained that Talx “returned half-empty questionnaires,” sent back “minimal or ‘junk’ info,” reported in error that applicants were dead, filed “frivolous protests” and caused “the holdup of many claims.”

Iowa passed a similar law in 2008 to curtail unnecessary appeals. Of the 10 employers who most often appealed after failing to respond to data requests, officials said nine were represented by Talx, including Cargill, Target, Tyson Foods, Wal-Mart and Wells Fargo."

---
Now do you still have any doubts about the law's existence and purpose, or are you going to insist that I look up the exact passages in the Wisconsin and Iowa Statutes. How about YOU do some research?

[jody]

25. Obviously the law is ineffective if the state complains illegal practices still continue. On the

other hand companies may not be not violating the law.

Have a great day and good bye :hi:

[CoffeeCat]

26. We're not talking about fraud here...

...we're discussing legitimate unemployment claims and how this
company is slowing down those claims--or worse, leading legitimate
claimants to give up on getting their benefits--due to the ham-handed
tactics of this firm.

I thought it was clear, from this article, that the entire problem
was that unemployed people who deserve benefits were being thrown
administrative roadblocks that denied them their promised benefits.

[BeyondGeography]

11. The primary aim of this company isn't to fight fraud, it's to fuck with people

and save their mighty clients a few bucks at a time, which adds up to a mighty sum.

I'd sooner live with my mother at age 50 than do this for a living.

[laughingliberal]

12. No different than the insurance companies who claim 'fraud' to avoid covering their customers who

get sick. We have an absolutely evil and disgusting business environment in this country. We can add the organizations who make their living helping companies thwart their workers' attempts to unionize.

[Greyhound]

13. They got me last year. As budget shortfalls expand, states are becoming very

compliant with these schemes. A straight-forward lay-off is contested and appealed for months until a sympathetic "hearing officer" is found.

[marmar]

16. Unreal.....This is the world's most un-democratic democracy.

nt

[Duer 157099]

19. If only I believed in Hell. I'd be convinced there's a special circle for these fucks n/t

[Duer 157099]

20. If I had to choose between a job with that company and suicide, guess which I would choose? n/t