[WA] Denied UI benefits even though Amazon told ESD I was "Fired" — Seeking advice on this contradiction
I’m currently navigating an appeal with the Washington State Employment Security Department (ESD) and wanted to see if anyone else has dealt with this specific level of contradiction between an employer and the state.
The Separation:
I recently separated from Amazon. During the process, I was presented with the PIVOT program and chose the severance option. Following this, Amazon HR issued me a formal letter explicitly titled "Involuntary Termination."
The ESD Determination:
Despite that letter, ESD denied my claim for benefits. Their official reasoning was: "Employee quit because they thought they would be fired. But the employer never made the decision to fire them." Because they coded it as a "voluntary quit," they determined I didn't have good cause.
The OAH Document Contradiction:
I’ve since received the case file for my appeal from the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). In the state's own records of their fact-finding with the company, the transcript shows this direct exchange:
- Question to Employer: "What do you have as the reason for the claimant's separation?"
- Amazon’s Response: "The claimant was fired."
The Situation:
So, I have an HR letter saying "Involuntary Termination," and the employer told the state I was "Fired"—yet the state adjudicator manually coded it as a "Quit" and denied the claim.
I have filed an appeal and am currently waiting for a hearing date with an Administrative Law Judge.
Has anyone had a hearing where the state tried to argue you "quit" even though the employer’s official documentation and their direct response to the state both say "Fired" or "Involuntary"? How did the judge handle the state over-ruling the employer's own classification?
TL;DR: Amazon HR letter says "Involuntary," and Amazon told ESD I was "Fired," but ESD denied me anyway, claiming I "quit" because I chose severance over PIVOT. Looking for insight before my OAH hearing.