u/triplemymint

Hey everyone,

I recently had my phone conversation with an MDES investigator for my unemployment claim after voluntarily resigning from my job due to intolerable conditions. I quit due to ongoing discrimination and retaliation, scheduling, pay issues, false write ups, ignored Ethics/Speak Out complaints, and a hostile environment that was never resolved. Please keep in mind, I had to get someone in claimant to fill it out and she even watered my situation down due to stating “I can’t type all of that.”

During the call the investigator kept pushing for the “final incident” for additional details. He summarized it as me reaching out to my supervisor about scheduling, getting no response from the supe, being removed from the group chat, and then resigning. He seemed to base everything around former employer’s version that it was “around scheduling.” (I only said their version because he slipped up and said it.) I repeatedly corrected him that scheduling was just one symptom of the broader discrimination/retaliation pattern, not the sole reason, and that I had made multiple internal complaints all the way up to HR Vice President where she indirectly refused to allow me to escalate to corporate compliance after she ignored majority everything at her HR level.

I’m going to assume the investigator already spoke to my former employer first. I was caught off guard (just woke up) and feel like the phone format made it hard to give the full picture after I asked if I could email him answering his question, he refused stating we don’t do emails basically.

Am I misreading everything ? Normal ? - definitely prepared for the appeals if it goes that far

TL;DR:
MDES investigator kept pushing for one “final incident” (scheduling/group chat) based on former employer’s version. I corrected that it was ongoing discrimination/retaliation + ignored complaints. Phone call felt limiting. Normal process? What happens next?

I filed my unemployment claim in Mississippi in mid-May 2026. I received an initial monetary determination showing $0 WBA due to insufficient wages.

According to MDES’s own website, the base period is the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters prior to the claim date which is in middle of Q2 in mid May of 2026.

My latest job’s Q1 2026 (January–March 2026) was fully completed on March 31, 2026. I had strong wages from my most recent employer in that quarter that should satisfy the wage requirements.

However, the initial monetary determination only used wages from January 1 – December 31, 2025 and showed $0 WBA. They completely excluded my completed Q1 2026 wages from my most recent employer. They are currently processing my USPS federal wages (from 2025), which I understand takes extra time despite it was excluded on the determination as well.

I filed a detailed appeal with paystubs, IRS transcript, and quoted their own base period rule. I only got this as a respnse: “The base period includes the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters prior to the beginning date of the claim. Mississippi does not use an alternate base period to calculate benefits” without explaining why they excluded a completed quarter, even though they asked for 2026 wage information from my previous employers in 2025.

I’m aware Q2 2026 cannot be used because it is the current quarter. What I don’t understand is why wages from a completed prior quarter (Q1 2026) are being excluded.

TL;DR:
MDES is excluding my completed Q1 2026 wages from my most recent employer, even though their published policy says the base period includes the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters before the claim date. They are processing 2025 wages from other jobs but ignoring 2026 wages from my last job. Has anyone in Mississippi seen this before? Is this normal, or should I push harder at a hearing?

Any insight or similar experiences would be appreciated. Thanks!

EDITED : Thanks for the explanation - I see what you're saying about "first four of the last five."

Using that reading, the five-quarter block is Q1 2025 through Q1 2026, and they take the first four chronologically (all of 2025), dropping Q1 2026. That matches what MDES told me.

However, what's still confusing me is this: MDES specifically asked me for 2026 wage information from my previous employers of 2025 federal + other job and the portal even shows "Wage increase requested" after I submitted 2026 wages.
But they are completely excluding 2026 wages from my most
RECENT employer even though that quarter (Q1 2026) was fully completed before I filed on May 21, 2026.

The rule says "the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters immediately preceding the beginning date of the claim."
If they're going to request 2026 wages from older jobs, it seems inconsistent to automatically exclude them from the most recent job.

If someone can explain how the rule is applied starting from the claim filing date, I WOULD 100% understand.

You guys did help me see what they were doing though, but it's still confusing and not making sense

I plan to preserve my role within my current role which is a typical gaurd who monitors gate, log trucks temperature and fuel, etc. recently, I have been subjected to conditions that’s unbearable so I was offered weight master role or I can quit. ( I have all documentation and evidence for my good cause that I won’t list)

The letter said:
Position: “Scales”
• Classification “remains the same as current” it’s not per post orders and classification it’s “weight master”
• Benefits remain the same (not detailed)
• Pay and schedule listed
• But no actual duties were described (detailed)

The effective date was May 29 (or sooner depending on backfill availability for my current post). The position at Scales was already open/empty, yet they still made it conditional on hiring my replacement first. effective date was May 29 (or sooner depending on backfill availability for my current post). The position at Scales was already open/empty, yet they still made it conditional on hiring my replacement first.

In my opinion this offer was not suitable or available because:

• Weight Master is a completely different job (regulated scale operation, axle-by-axle weighing, filling USDA/Packers & Stockyards forms, federal liability for inaccurate weights under OMB 0580-0015). I have zero training or experience in it, and I never signed the required Weigher’s Acknowledgement that others did.
• It removes me entirely from gate/access control duties — no badges, no gate arm, no ISN check-ins. It’s a new field not similer occupation that comes certification in compliance with the law that I’m not certified or train for
• The offer was vague and didn’t disclose the real duties or federal risks, while mentioning I am trained despite I have my entire training file which I am not and he (HR) stated it as well prior.
• It wasn’t immediately available due to the backfill contingency.
I chose to quit rather than sign something unclear that didn’t preserve my current role.
I have strong documentation on everything (post orders showing two different roles, training records showing I wasn’t trained, my preservation attempts, disciplinary notices, etc.).

TL;DR:
Employer offered a vague, conditional transfer to a completely different Weight Master role (no training, federal liability, different duties/job code) instead of fixing bad conditions in my gate guard position. Is this considered a valid/suitable/available offer that should disqualify me from MDES unemployment in Mississippi? Or do I have strong grounds on appeal to argue unsuitable + not available + good cause?

Does a job transfer offer still count as a valid available“suitable work” offer for unemployment purposes if:

the start date is delayed or depends on staffing/backfill, and
the duties differ from the employee’s current role (different classification/tasks), and
the offer is internal (same employer)?

In general, what makes a job offer “valid” or “bona fide” for unemployment purposes — does it need to be immediately available and fully defined, or can conditional/delayed offers still count?

I am resigning voluntarily due to my conditions I was subjected to at my employment.