I do realize that Illinois and some other states actually require a hearing officer, referee, commissioner, ALJ, examiner or whatever title they give that person that resides over a lower level unemployment hearing, to actually be an attorney, Have you never heard of the Pennsylvania Harkness Decision? All the result of an attorney that got all bent over being beat by a lay rep at a lower level PA unemployment hearing. Pennsylvania had to change their statutes to overcome it. PA referees do not need to be attorneys.

A number of states do not even require that the person residing over the unemployment hearing be an attorney and they render decisions based on statute and precedents.

There are five states in this country that require a “paid hearing representative be an attorney. WV, KS, SC, MO, SD, and NC and AZ require that the representative only present an attorney supervisory letter.

What’s worse, and probably why this is so, is that many state statutes dissuade the representation by attorneys of unemployment claimants at hearings by regulating a limit that can be charged to the claimant.

How does a state keep their unemployment recipiency rate down? By herding us to the unemployment hearing without the proper information to prepare for the hearing that “creates the record” that all further appeals must be based upon.

We’re screwed!

I just read another post .. by another attorney which linked to yours. There was some vague reference to the behavior of these lay reps for employers at unemployment hearings. Guess what, most of them have a win/loss ratio of 75/25 percent. And you oughta hear’em talk about attorneys who show up for claimants at unemployment hearings .. resided over by a non-attorney.

The only ones hurt by all this is the unemployment claimant who is trying to figure out how to get benefits, but can’t find any information which actually explains how to win an unemployment hearing. They are unemployed. Can they afford an attorney?

It’s called a rock and a hard place.

Thank you.