My husband has recently started working with his old employer again temporarily but will most likely get laid off again in September. I've looked at the ncesc. site and called there as well but I'm still confused when it comes to the so called base period. They told me that if he was to file in September they would count the first quarter of 2009 and the last 3 quarters of 2008 to see if there were enough earnings to receive benefits. On their website however it states that the Base Period is made up of the first four of the last five calender quarters - the 5 quarters before filing claim,excluding the period(??) in which filing the claim :?::?: what exactly does that mean in plain english? Also,for how many weeks can you receive benefits? I heard that it was extended. Thanks in advance!!
What they told you on the phone agrees with the website. The 5 quarters previous to a September filing would be: 04/01/2009 - 06/30/2009 01/01/2009 - 03/31/2009 10/01/2008 - 12/31/2008 07/01/2008 - 09/30/2008 04/01/2008 - 06/30/2008 So the first four would be the period from 04/01/2008 through 03/31/2009, or the last three quarters of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009. If he filed in October, the applicable quarters would be the last two of 2008 and the first two of 2009 (07/01/2008 - 06/30/2009), if that would make your base higher I might file on October 1. As far as your second question, I have no idea.
Thanks for the clearing up!! I had not thought that it would be going all the way back to spring before this years earnings were being counted. So the base period in which they calculate your earnings is made up of 4 quarters in total,correct?
Yes. Not counting the current quarter and the last completed quarter, it's the 4 quarters before that.
Thanks! They might as well make it four quarters in 2002 or in 1989,why don't they count more recent earnings I wonder?
It may not all be in the system in all cases. Employers have to file reports of earnings, and there's a lag time between when the wages are actually earned and when the reports need to be filed. So they probably have more accurate records by going back a quarter.
Make sense to go back one quarter! But why do they have to go back all the way to the first quarter of '09,wouldn't that be more than just going back one quarter
We are currently in the 3rd quarter of the year. They don't count the current quarter, so the 3rd quarter doesn't count. They don't count the last completed quarter, which would be the 2nd quarter of this year. So going back to the first quarter is, in fact, just going back one completed quarter.
So just to make sure - If he filed lets say as late as in December '09, the applicable quarters still would be the last two of 2008 and the first two of 2009 (07/01/2008 - 06/30/2009)? Thanks in advance!
