Exempt salaried employees denied SDI & UI benefits? California eligibility confusion

Your HR department is 100% WRONG. Exempt status has NOTHING to do with SDI eligibility. In California, almost all employees (including exempt salaried workers) have SDI automatically deducted from their paychecks, which means you ARE eligible for SDI benefits if you have a qualifying medical condition. As for unemployment, exempt status doesn't disqualify you either. UI eligibility depends on whether you're unemployed through no fault of your own and meet other EDD requirements, not on your exempt/non-exempt classification. I've been an exempt employee for 8+ years and successfully claimed both types of benefits when needed. Print out the EDD eligibility requirements and take them to your HR department!

i think it depends on if ur company has a private insurance plan instead of the state one. some bigger companies opt out of the state program and have their own disability insurance. maybe thats what ur HR meant?

I literally just went through this exact situation last month. I'm an exempt employee (marketing director) and successfully applied for SDI after a surgery. The process was pretty straightforward: 1. Had my doctor complete their portion of the SDI claim form 2. I completed my section online through the EDD website 3. Received confirmation within 10 days 4. Started receiving benefits about 2 weeks after that The only complication was that I had to call EDD to clarify something on my application, and it took FOREVER to get through. After 30+ attempts over 3 days, I finally tried a service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that got me connected to an EDD agent within 15 minutes. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/JmuwXR7HA10?si=TSwYbu_GOwYzt9km Don't let your HR department mislead you - your exempt status is completely irrelevant to SDI eligibility!

wait i'm confused now too... i thought exempt meant u were like an independent contractor? isn't that different from salaried?

Some companies try to pull this nonsense because they don't want their unemployment insurance rates to go up. They're hoping you don't know your rights. I work in HR (not for your company obviously) and this kind of misinformation makes my blood boil. If you've had SDI deductions from your paychecks, you ARE eligible - period. For unemployment, the only thing that matters is: 1. Were you separated from employment through no fault of your own? 2. Are you able and available to work? 3. Are you actively seeking employment? 4. Did you earn enough wages during the base period? Your exempt status has ZERO bearing on this. Please report your HR department to the California Labor Commissioner if they continue giving you incorrect information that could prevent you from receiving benefits you're entitled to.

Fwiw my wife is exempt (financial controller) and she took 6 weeks SDI after having our baby last year. Zero issues with eligibility.

Update: I spoke with HR again today and showed them the information everyone shared. Turns out the person I initially talked to was new and confused exempt status with being an independent contractor! The HR director apologized and confirmed that I AM eligible for both SDI and UI benefits (though obviously not at the same time). They're going to provide additional training to their team. Thank you all for helping me straighten this out before I made medical decisions based on incorrect information!

This is such a great example of why it's so important to verify information from HR departments! I'm a benefits administrator and I see this confusion all the time - companies mixing up employment classifications with benefit eligibility. Just to add some additional clarity for anyone reading this: California Labor Code Section 2626 specifically states that SDI coverage applies to most employees regardless of their exempt/non-exempt status. The only real exclusions are certain government employees, some railroad workers, and people who earn above the wage cap (which is quite high). For UI benefits, the key statute is California Unemployment Insurance Code Section 601, which defines "employee" broadly and doesn't exclude exempt workers. The classification that matters for UI is whether you're an actual employee versus an independent contractor. Really glad you got this sorted out with your HR team - hopefully this will help them avoid giving incorrect information to other employees in the future!

This thread is so eye-opening! I'm an exempt manager at a tech startup and honestly had no idea about the specifics of SDI eligibility. Reading through everyone's experiences makes me realize I should probably review my own benefits knowledge before I ever need to use them. One quick question for the group - does anyone know if the SDI benefit amount is calculated differently for exempt vs non-exempt employees? I know it's based on wages, but since exempt employees don't track hours the same way, I'm curious if there are any differences in how they calculate the weekly benefit amount. Also want to echo what others have said about companies sometimes giving bad info to avoid claims. My previous employer tried to discourage people from filing workers' comp claims by making the process seem way more complicated than it actually was. Always worth doing your own research!

Just wanted to chime in as someone who went through this exact same confusion a few years ago! I'm an exempt IT manager and when I needed to take medical leave for a back injury, my company's HR initially told me I wasn't covered by SDI because I was "management level." What really helped me was calling EDD directly to verify my eligibility before even talking to HR again. The EDD representative was super helpful and explained that as long as I had SDI deductions on my paystubs (which I did), I was definitely covered regardless of my job title or exempt status. I ended up printing out the official EDD eligibility guidelines from their website and brought them to my next meeting with HR. Suddenly they "remembered" that exempt employees are indeed covered! It's frustrating how common this misinformation seems to be. For anyone dealing with this - don't take your employer's word for it when it comes to benefits you've been paying into. Go straight to the source (EDD) to get accurate information. Your paycheck deductions don't lie!

This entire thread has been such a wake-up call! I'm also an exempt employee (marketing manager) and I never realized how much confusion there is around these benefits. Reading everyone's experiences makes me want to double-check my own company's HR policies. It's really concerning how many different companies seem to spread this same misinformation. I'm wondering if there should be some kind of mandatory training for HR departments about basic benefit eligibility rules? It seems like too many employees are getting bad advice about benefits they're literally paying for through payroll deductions. Thanks to everyone who shared their stories and legal references - I'm definitely saving this thread for future reference. And huge props to Fatima for standing up to her HR department and getting this corrected not just for herself but potentially for other employees too!

This is such an important thread for exempt employees to read! I'm a software engineering manager and had no idea that this kind of confusion was so widespread. Reading through everyone's experiences really drives home how critical it is to verify benefits information independently. What strikes me most is how consistent this misinformation seems to be across different companies - it makes me wonder if there are outdated training materials or misconceptions being passed down through HR circles. The fact that so many people have had to essentially educate their own HR departments is both frustrating and concerning. I'm definitely going to review my own company's benefits documentation and maybe even proactively ask our HR team about SDI eligibility just to make sure they have the right information. Better to catch any confusion before it becomes an issue when someone actually needs these benefits. Thanks to everyone who shared their stories and especially to those who provided the specific legal code references - this thread is going to be incredibly helpful for so many people!

Wow, this thread has been incredibly enlightening! I'm an exempt HR coordinator myself (yes, the irony isn't lost on me) and I'm honestly embarrassed by how many HR departments seem to be spreading this misinformation. In my experience, a lot of this confusion stems from outdated training materials and the fact that employment law is constantly evolving. Many HR professionals learned the basics years ago and haven't kept up with current regulations or clarifications. What really bothers me is that this isn't just an innocent mistake - when employees are denied benefits they've been paying into through payroll deductions, it can have serious financial consequences during already stressful times. I'm going to use this thread as a case study to review our own department's benefits training and make sure we're giving accurate information. Thank you all for sharing your experiences - it's a good reminder that even HR professionals need to continuously educate themselves and verify information rather than relying on assumptions or outdated knowledge. For anyone dealing with similar situations: always ask to see the specific policy or regulation that supposedly disqualifies you. If HR can't provide it, that's a red flag that they might be operating on incorrect assumptions.