PA UC denying benefits due to Careerlink registration from previous employer - How to fight mixed claim issues?
I'm so frustrated with PA unemployment right now! Here's my situation: I lost my job at a marketing firm in September 2025 (Employer A) and immediately filed for UC. I got denied benefits because of the separation reason, which was frustrating but whatever. I quickly found a new job at a tech company (Employer B) and started October 1st. Unfortunately, I developed severe pneumonia and missed too many days - they let me go on November 8th. When I filed for UC this time, the examiner APPROVED my claim based on my medical separation from Employer B. But now they're denying my actual benefit payments saying I didn't register with PA CareerLink by October 4th for my FIRST claim with Employer A! This makes zero sense - I was WORKING on October 4th at my new job! Why would I need to register with CareerLink when I was already employed? They're telling me I need to file an appeal, but this seems like an administrative error on their part. They're mixing up two completely different claims! Has anyone dealt with something like this? I'm only seeking benefits for November onward from Employer B, not from the first job. Any advice on handling this mess?
27 comments


Fatima Al-Mazrouei
omg this system is such a mess!! i had something sorta similar happen last year. the left hand doesnt know what the right is doing at UC. call them ASAP!!
0 coins
Giovanni Gallo
•I've been trying to call for 3 days straight! Can't get through at all. Just busy signals or the automated message saying call volume is too high. This is driving me crazy!
0 coins
Dylan Wright
This is definitely a system issue. PA UC often struggles with separating multiple claims within the same benefit year. The problem is that technically, you're still in the same benefit year that started with Employer A, even though you're now claiming based on Employer B. The CareerLink registration requirement applies to your benefit year, not individual employers. However, since you were employed on the date they're citing for the registration deadline, you have a valid reason for not registering. This is worth appealing because you have documented proof (your W-2 or pay stubs from Employer B) showing employment during that period. Use the appeal form to clearly explain: 1. The timeline of both employments with exact dates 2. That you were actively employed on the date they required CareerLink registration 3. That you're only seeking benefits from the November separation Attach copies of pay stubs or other proof of employment covering the October period. This is definitely appealable.
0 coins
NebulaKnight
•That might not work tho. My cousin filed an appeal for a similar issue and it got denied bcuz they said work search requirements are retroactive to when u FIRST file in a benefit year, doesn't matter if u got a job after. The whole system is broken!!!!
0 coins
Sofia Ramirez
When I read your post I WAS LITERALLY NODDING MY HEAD!!! PA UC does this ALL THE TIME!! They denied me benefits for 6 weeks because of something from a claim 3 months earlier that had nothing to do with my current situation. Its like the computer system just flags stuff randomly. I think you definetly need to appeal because its the only way to get a HUMAN to actually look at your case properly.
0 coins
Dmitry Popov
You've encountered one of the more common technical glitches in the PA UC system. When you have multiple employers within the same benefit year, the system often applies requirements from your first claim to subsequent claims. Here's what's happening: Your benefit year started when you filed after Employer A. Even though that claim was denied, the system still established your benefit year and attached the CareerLink registration requirement to it. When you filed again after Employer B, you're still in the same benefit year, so the system is carrying over that requirement. You're right that this shouldn't apply since you were working, but unfortunately, filing an appeal is actually the correct procedure here. This is because: 1. The determination letter denying benefits has already been issued 2. The system won't override it without formal review 3. Appeals are the mechanism for correcting these errors In your appeal, specifically state that you were fully employed from 10/1/25 to 11/8/25, making the 10/4/25 CareerLink registration requirement inapplicable. Include documentation showing your employment during this period. This is a clear-cut case where an appeal should be successful.
0 coins
Giovanni Gallo
•Thank you for the detailed explanation! This makes more sense now, even though it's still frustrating. I'll definitely file the appeal with my employment documentation. Do you know how long appeals typically take to process? I'm worried about bills piling up while waiting.
0 coins
Ava Rodriguez
I went through almost this exact scenario last year. I was getting nowhere with the appeal process for weeks - couldn't get updates or talk to anyone who understood my situation. I finally used Claimyr (claimyr.com) to get through to an actual PA UC agent right away instead of facing busy signals. The agent I spoke with immediately understood the issue and flagged my case for expedited review since it was clearly a system error. My appeal was processed within days after that call instead of waiting months. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/CEPETxZdo9E?si=WL1ZzVZWG3KiHrg2 - it was honestly the only way I could get through to a real person who could help.
0 coins
Fatima Al-Mazrouei
•does that service actually work? i tried calling UC like 50 times last month and never got through...
0 coins
Miguel Ortiz
wait im confused. so u were denied benefits for first employer but now ur getting denied for second employer cause of something related to first employer?? how does that even make sense?? PA unemployment system is soooo broken ugh
0 coins
Dmitry Popov
•That's correct. The system is linking requirements across both claims because they fall within the same benefit year (which lasts 52 weeks from initial filing). While it seems illogical, the way to resolve it is through appeal, providing proof of employment during the period when CareerLink registration was required.
0 coins
Dylan Wright
One important thing to include in your appeal: print out your PA CareerLink registration confirmation (if you've registered now) and include it with your appeal. Even though you were working on the original deadline date, showing that you've now completed registration can help your case. Also, continue filing your weekly claims while waiting for the appeal decision! Many people stop filing during appeals and lose benefits for those weeks even if they win the appeal. Don't make that mistake.
0 coins
Giovanni Gallo
•Thanks for this tip! I've already registered with CareerLink as soon as I realized it was an issue, so I'll definitely include that confirmation. And I'll keep filing weekly claims - I almost did stop doing that thinking it was pointless while waiting.
0 coins
Sofia Ramirez
My neighbor works for PA UC (dont tell anyone lol) and she says this happens ALL THE TIME with their system. The computer doesnt know how to handle multiple employers in one benefit year properly. She said always appeal these decisions cause a human reviewer will almost always fix it when they see the timeline. Just make sure you have your dates super clear in your appeal letter!!!
0 coins
Zainab Khalil
quick question - did u get a financial determination letter for your second claim? that would tell u if they're actually processing it as a new claim or just continuing the old one. might help with your appeal to reference the financial determination letter numbers.
0 coins
Giovanni Gallo
•Yes, I did get a financial determination letter for the second claim! It has a different claim ID number than my first one, which makes this even more confusing. I'll definitely reference both numbers in my appeal. Good thinking!
0 coins
Avery Saint
This is exactly why I always tell people to document EVERYTHING when dealing with PA UC! Your situation is a perfect example of how their system creates problems by mixing up different claims. Since you have different claim ID numbers for each employer, that's actually really helpful evidence that these should be treated as separate issues. I'd recommend organizing your appeal letter chronologically: - Sept 2025: Lost job at Employer A, filed claim, got denied (include claim ID) - Oct 1-Nov 8: Worked at Employer B (include pay stubs/employment verification) - Nov 8: Lost job at Employer B due to medical issues - Filed new claim for Employer B (include this claim ID) The key point is that on Oct 4th when they wanted you to register with CareerLink, you were EMPLOYED and had no reason to register. You weren't receiving benefits and weren't looking for work because you HAD work. Keep pushing - this is definitely an error on their part that should be corrected through appeal!
0 coins
Alexander Zeus
•This is really helpful advice! I'm going to use this exact chronological format for my appeal letter. Having it laid out step by step like this makes it so much clearer why their CareerLink requirement doesn't apply to my situation. I never thought to emphasize that I was EMPLOYED and didn't need to register because I already had a job - that's such a key point! Thanks for breaking it down so clearly.
0 coins
Ashley Adams
I'm dealing with something similar right now! PA UC's system is notorious for these kinds of cross-claim issues. The fact that you have two different claim ID numbers is actually really strong evidence that these should be handled separately. One thing that helped me was calling my local CareerLink office directly (not the UC hotline) - they were able to look up my registration status and provide written confirmation of when I registered. Since you were employed during the period they're requiring registration for, you might also want to get a letter from Employer B confirming your employment dates from October 1st through November 8th. The appeal is definitely your best bet here. Make sure to emphasize that you were gainfully employed and had no obligation to register with CareerLink since you weren't receiving benefits or actively job searching. This seems like a clear-cut case where the automated system is applying the wrong requirements to your situation. Hang in there - these appeals usually get resolved once a human actually reviews the timeline!
0 coins
NeonNomad
•This is such great advice about contacting CareerLink directly! I didn't even think about getting written confirmation from them about my registration status. And you're absolutely right about getting an employment verification letter from Employer B - that would be solid proof that I was working during the timeframe in question. I'm definitely going to do both of these things before submitting my appeal. It's so frustrating that we have to jump through all these hoops for what's clearly a system error, but at least there are ways to build a strong case. Thanks for the practical tips!
0 coins
Lindsey Fry
I went through something very similar a few months ago and it's absolutely maddening! The PA UC system has this weird quirk where once you establish a benefit year (even if denied), any subsequent claims within that 52-week period inherit certain requirements from the original filing. What helped me was being super explicit in my appeal about the timeline - I literally created a day-by-day calendar showing I was employed during the CareerLink registration deadline. I also included: - Screenshots of my online UC account showing the two different claim numbers - Pay stubs covering the entire October period - A simple statement: "Claimant was fully employed and earning wages on 10/4/25, therefore CareerLink registration was not required as claimant was not seeking employment assistance" The appeal took about 3 weeks but they reversed the decision immediately once a human reviewer saw the documentation. The key is making it crystal clear that you weren't job searching because you already HAD a job! Don't let their broken system discourage you - this is definitely winnable with proper documentation.
0 coins
Sophie Hernandez
•This is exactly the kind of detailed approach I needed to hear about! Creating a day-by-day calendar is brilliant - it makes the timeline crystal clear and removes any ambiguity about when I was employed versus when they wanted me to register. I love the simple statement you included too - "claimant was not seeking employment assistance" - that cuts right to the heart of why their requirement doesn't make sense. It's ridiculous that we have to build such extensive documentation for what should be an obvious system error, but your success story gives me hope that it's worth the effort. Three weeks isn't too bad for an appeal timeline either. Thanks for sharing the specific language and documentation strategy - this is incredibly helpful!
0 coins
Lara Woods
This is such a frustrating but unfortunately common issue with PA UC! I work in HR and see this exact scenario play out regularly - their system has a hard time distinguishing between claims within the same benefit year, even when circumstances are completely different. Your situation is actually pretty straightforward from a legal standpoint: you were employed and earning wages on October 4th, which means you had no obligation to register with CareerLink. The work search requirements (including CareerLink registration) only apply when you're actively receiving benefits or eligible to receive them while unemployed. A few things that might strengthen your appeal: - Get a wage verification letter from Employer B showing you were on payroll 10/1-11/8 - Screenshot your UC account showing the two different claim numbers - Emphasize in your appeal that you're seeking benefits based solely on the 11/8/25 separation from Employer B The fact that your examiner already APPROVED your claim based on the medical separation tells me they understand your situation - this denial is purely a system glitch mixing up your two different claims. Appeals for these administrative errors usually get resolved quickly once a human reviews the file. Keep filing your weekly claims during the appeal process! Many people make the mistake of stopping and lose weeks of benefits even when they win.
0 coins
Sean O'Donnell
•This is really reassuring to hear from someone in HR who sees these cases regularly! You're absolutely right that the examiner approving my claim shows they understand the actual situation - it really does seem like just a system glitch. I'm definitely going to get that wage verification letter from Employer B and take screenshots of both claim numbers like you suggested. It's good to know that appeals for administrative errors usually move faster than other types. And thanks for the reminder about continuing to file weekly claims - I almost made that mistake! Having professional insight into how common this issue is makes me feel much more confident about appealing.
0 coins
Darcy Moore
I've been following this thread and wow, the amount of detailed advice here is incredible! As someone who's dealt with PA UC's confusing system before, I can't stress enough how important it is to document EVERYTHING like everyone's mentioned. One thing I'd add that hasn't been mentioned yet - when you file your appeal, consider sending it via certified mail so you have proof of delivery. PA UC has been known to "lose" appeals or claim they never received them, and having that tracking number can be a lifesaver. Also, if you have any medical documentation related to your pneumonia (doctor's notes, hospital records, etc.) that led to your separation from Employer B, include copies with your appeal. It reinforces that your November claim is completely legitimate and separate from the September issue. The fact that you have two different claim IDs really should make this a slam dunk case once a human actually looks at it. The system is clearly just auto-applying old requirements where they don't belong. Hang in there - based on all the success stories shared here, you've got a really strong case!
0 coins
Nathan Dell
•The certified mail tip is so smart! I never would have thought about PA UC potentially "losing" appeals, but that makes total sense given how disorganized their system seems to be. I definitely want that paper trail. And yes, I do have documentation from my doctor about the pneumonia - hospitalization records, work restrictions, the whole thing. I'll include all of that to show the November separation was completely legitimate and medical. It's amazing how much preparation goes into what should be a simple fix, but I really appreciate everyone sharing their experiences and strategies. This thread has given me a complete roadmap for building a bulletproof appeal!
0 coins
Javier Garcia
I'm reading through all these responses and honestly, this whole thread should be required reading for anyone dealing with PA UC! It's both horrifying and reassuring to see how common these system glitches are. One thing I wanted to add that might help - if you're still having trouble getting through on the phone lines, try calling right at 8:00 AM when they open or during lunch hours (around 12-1 PM). I've had better luck getting through during those times. Also, some people have had success calling the employer services line instead of the claimant line - they sometimes transfer you to someone who can actually help. Your situation is so clearly a system error that got flagged incorrectly. The fact that you were working full-time on the date they wanted you to register with CareerLink should make this appeal pretty straightforward. Keep all your documentation organized and definitely follow everyone's advice about the certified mail and continuing to file weekly claims. This system is broken but it sounds like you've got all the right evidence to get this fixed. Don't let them wear you down - you've got this!
0 coins