Unemployment insurance benefits; Whether claimant was monetarily eligible; MCL 421.46; “Benefit year”; Wages paid; Whether the Unemployment Insurance Agency (UIA) has authority to seek judicial review of Unemployment Insurance Appeals Commission (UIAC) decisions; MCL 421.34; MCL 421.38; Waiver; Effect of the UIA’s failure to attend the hearing held before the administrative law judge (ALJ); MCL 421.33

The court held that (1) the UIA has the right to seek judicial review of UIAC decisions, (2) it did not waive its right to do so by failing to attend the hearing held before the ALJ, and (3) MCL 421.46 “specifies that the formula for establishing a benefit year requires a determination of the wages paid to the individual.” Thus, it concluded claimant-Schulmeyer’s wage history could not establish a benefit year and he was not monetarily eligible for unemployment benefits. The trial court affirmed the UIAC’s determination that Schulmeyer was monetarily eligible. The UIA appealed. Schulmeyer first argued that the UIA lacked the authority to seek judicial review of UIAC final determinations. “Based upon the plain language of MCL 421.34,” the court disagreed. It noted that “the UIA is statutorily defined as an interested party in matters before ‘a court’” and that the only limit on an interested party’s ability “to seek judicial review is that it must be conducted as provided in MCL 421.38.” In turn, there is no language in that statute “expressly prohibiting the UIA from appealing a UIAC decision.” As to Schulmeyer’s waiver argument, the “UIA is not statutorily required to attend hearings before an ALJ.” While MCL 421.33 “provides that if the appellant fails to appear or prosecute the appeal, then the proceedings may be dismissed[,]” no language in the statute indicates “that if the appellee fails to appear or defend its position that a default will be entered against the appellee that will preclude the appellee from challenging the factual findings or legal conclusions of the ALJ.” Thus, the court would “not read such a requirement into the statute.” As to the issue of Schulmeyer’s eligibility for benefits, to be monetarily eligible “a claimant must establish a ‘benefit year’ under MCL 421.46.” The method for establishing a benefit year stated in MCL 421.46(b)(1) was relevant here. The court found that “an interpretation of MCL 421.46(b) that considers the total wages earned” as opposed to wages paid “is contrary to the plain language of the statute.” Regardless of the UIA website’s apparent use of the terms interchangeably, the statutory formula “looks to when wages were paid, not when they were earned.” Considering Schulmeyer’s wages “in the quarters in which they were paid rather than” those in which they were earned, he could not establish a benefit year. Reversed and remanded.