This is such valuable information that more people need to know about! I'm a newcomer to this community but have been dealing with unemployment issues myself. The fact that this 6x requalification rule isn't prominently displayed during the application process is really problematic. I've been reading through state UI handbooks from other states and it seems like Washington could do a much better job of making these requirements clear upfront. Some states actually have a pre-application checklist that walks you through ALL the requirements before you even start the process. For anyone else who might be in a similar situation - it might be worth checking if your previous employer reported all your wages correctly too. Sometimes there are reporting errors that can affect your earnings calculations. You can request a wage statement from ESD to verify what they have on file. Really hoping your appeal or the freelance documentation route works out, Wesley! Keep us posted on how it goes.

This is exactly why I joined this community - to learn about these hidden rules before they bite me! I'm currently employed but worried about potential layoffs, and I had UI benefits about 18 months ago. Reading this thread is a real eye-opener about the 6x requalification requirement. It sounds like the key takeaway is to always assume you'll need to earn at least 6 times your potential weekly benefit amount after any UI claim ends, just to be safe. I'm going to start keeping better records of ALL my earnings (including any side work) just in case I need to document everything later. Wesley, your situation really highlights how the system can penalize people for relatively small shortfalls. $480 seems like such an arbitrary line to draw when you clearly made a good faith effort to return to work. I really hope the freelance documentation angle works out for you - it seems unfair that the system wouldn't count legitimate earnings just because of how they were paid. Thanks to everyone sharing their experiences and knowledge here. This kind of peer-to-peer information sharing is invaluable when dealing with such a complex system!

Thanks everyone for all the helpful info! I'm going to try setting it up this weekend and see how it goes. Fingers crossed the website cooperates.

Just wanted to share my experience - I actually just went through this process last week! The direct deposit option in SecureAccess Washington is under "Manage Your Claim" then "Payment Options." Make sure you have a PDF of your voided check ready to upload because they definitely require that for verification. One thing I learned the hard way is to double-check that your name on your bank account matches exactly what's on your unemployment claim - even middle initials matter. Mine got rejected the first time because my bank account had my full middle name but my ESD account only had the initial. Also, they send you a test deposit of like $0.01 first to verify the account works, so don't panic if you see that tiny amount show up before your actual payment. The whole thing took about 10 business days for me once I submitted everything correctly.

Just as an update for those facing similar issues: ESD implemented a new security protocol in early 2025 that sometimes causes these login problems. The technical explanation is that they're using a new multi-factor verification system on the backend that occasionally gets out of sync with their user database. When you call, specifically ask them to "reset your MFA token synchronization" - that's the technical term that will help the agent understand exactly what needs to be fixed. This is different from a simple password reset.

I've been dealing with similar login issues for weeks now! What finally worked for me was calling ESD early in the morning (right when they open at 8 AM) - seems like the phone lines are less jammed then. When I got through, the agent told me that their system has been having problems with accounts that were created or had password resets during certain time periods in February and March. She had to manually "refresh" my account status on their end. The whole call took about 15 minutes once I got connected. Definitely frustrating that we have to jump through so many hoops just to file our claims, but at least there seems to be a fix when you can actually reach someone!

The whole process is designed to eventually move forward even if employers don't cooperate. Washington ESD can't just leave claims hanging indefinitely - they have performance metrics and federal requirements to meet for processing times.

Just went through this exact situation last month. Employer never responded and my claim got approved after exactly 2 weeks and 3 days. Got all my back pay from the date I filed. Hang in there!

I went through this exact same situation about 6 months ago! The "Able and Available For Work -Hours" adjudication showed up on my account for almost 8 weeks, but I kept receiving my full weekly benefits the entire time. It eventually just disappeared on its own without me having to do anything. From what I learned talking to other people who've dealt with this, it's usually triggered by something minor like mentioning a doctor's appointment or having limited availability on a specific day in your weekly claim. The system flags it for review, but since it's not considered urgent, they don't stop payments while investigating. That said, I think uploading a simple letter explaining your husband's general availability is smart - better to be proactive than sorry! Keep it short and straightforward about his work hours and any reasonable limitations. The fact that he's still getting paid is a really good sign that this isn't a serious issue.

I'm going through something similar right now! My claim has had an "Able and Available For Work -Hours" adjudication pending for about 6 weeks, but like your husband, I'm still receiving my full weekly payments. What I've learned from calling ESD (after many, many attempts to get through) is that this type of adjudication is often triggered by routine system reviews or when you mention any kind of scheduling conflict in your weekly claims - even something as innocent as a medical appointment. The key thing is that since payments are continuing, it's classified as a "non-monetary" issue that doesn't require immediate resolution. However, I'd still recommend being proactive and uploading documentation. I submitted a letter about 3 weeks ago outlining my work availability, and while the adjudication status is still there, I haven't had any payment interruptions. One tip: if you do upload a letter, make sure to mention that any scheduling limitations are temporary and wouldn't prevent him from accepting suitable full-time employment. That seems to be what they're most concerned about verifying.