Denied by ESD Commissioner after relocating due to broken pay promises - need urgent RCW 34.05.464 advice

First, take a deep breath. The RCW 34.05.464 judicial review is basically asking the Superior Court to review if the Commissioner made legal errors in your case. You need to focus on showing the Commissioner misapplied the law, not just that you disagree with the outcome. For your situation, pull together ALL documentation showing: 1. The original pay promise (emails, offer letter, texts) 2. Evidence of the actual reduced pay (paystubs, employment contract) 3. All communications about your housing struggle due to the pay issue 4. Documentation showing you tried to resolve this before quitting Your strongest argument is that this wasn't truly "voluntary" - it was constructive discharge due to significantly changed employment terms after relocation. The employer effectively forced you out by not honoring the promised compensation that you relied on when relocating. For free legal help, try: - Unemployment Law Project: 206-441-9178 - Your county's Volunteer Legal Services - Washington Law Help website Time is critical, so call first thing tomorrow morning.

man this is exactly y i always get evrything in writng with jobs. if u dont hav the pay promis in a emal or text ur probly screwd sorry 2 say. ESD is so strict about voluntary quits. they rejected my claim 2 and i had WAY beter evidence

I went through a similar situation last year and successfully won my case on judicial review. The key was proving that I had no reasonable alternative but to quit - which sounds like your situation too. For the RCW 34.05.464 review, you need to specifically identify which parts of the Commissioner's decision were legally incorrect. Don't just say you disagree - point to specific RCWs or WACs that were misapplied. In your case, focus on WAC 192-150-090 (good cause for quitting - employer action or inaction creates impossible working conditions). A significant reduction in pay from what was promised when you relocated should qualify here. Make sure your petition for review is very clear and organized - judges have limited time. Create a timeline of events with references to your evidence. If you can't get a lawyer in time, at least have someone proofread your petition. Side note: I tried for weeks to reach ESD by phone to resolve my issue before going to court. Eventually used a service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that got me through to an actual agent in under 30 minutes. They have a demo video (https://youtu.be/7DieNd3C7zQ?si=26TzE_zGms-DODN3) that shows how it works. Might be worth trying before going to court, but you'd need to act fast.

DONT WASTE UR TIME!!!! The whole system is rigged against workers. I had TONS of evidence too and the commissioner just ignored it all. They just want to save money for business owners. I spent $120 filing fee for judicial review and the judge dismissed it in like 5 minutes. Complete waste of my time and money.

I work with unemployment appeals (not as a lawyer but in HR), and this seems like a strong case. For judicial review you're focusing on whether the Commissioner made an error in applying the law, not just re-arguing facts. A 45% reduction from promised wages after relocation could qualify under WAC 192-150-120 (Change in usual compensation). The standard is generally that a 25% or greater reduction can be good cause for quitting. Important points for your filing: 1. Calculate the EXACT percentage difference between promised pay and actual pay 2. Document that you attempted to resolve the issue before quitting 3. Show that continuing employment was economically unfeasible (housing costs vs. income) 4. Emphasize that you relocated specifically based on the promised compensation For the filing itself, be extremely organized. Create section headers, use bullet points, and include an evidence list with page numbers. Make it easy for the judge to find your key arguments. Time is critical though - don't miss that filing deadline!

Sorry about your situation pal but I'm confused about something. You said you were "overqualified" and "proved your worth" but then you also said you resigned to avoid a "toxic environment with drug users in new construction"? That part doesn't make sense with the pay reduction story. Were you in construction? Was that why the pay was lower? The commissioner might have been confused by mixed explanations too. Just saying you might want to keep your story straighter for the judicial review.

One more critical thing - for judicial review, you need to file in the county where you lived at the time of application OR in Thurston County. The filing fee is around $240, but you can request a fee waiver if you're low income (use the GR 34 form). Make sure to: 1. Name the correct parties (Commissioner and ESD must be named) 2. Properly serve all parties (you need to serve the Commissioner, ESD, and the Attorney General's office) 3. Include the complete agency record The standard of review is super important - the court will only overturn if: - Decision is outside the agency's authority - Decision is based on an error of law - Decision is not supported by substantial evidence - Decision is arbitrary and capricious Focus on the error of law aspect - specifically that the Commissioner failed to properly apply WAC 192-150-120 regarding substantial reduction in pay. With a 42.8% reduction, you're well above the 25% threshold that typically constitutes good cause.