MICHIGAN EMPLOYMENT SECURITY ACT
Act 1 of 1936 (Ex. Sess.)
421.31 Waiver of rights; limitation of fees.
Sec. 31.
No agreement by an individual to wave, release, or commute his rights to benefits or any other rights under this act from an employer shall be valid. No agreements by an individual in the employ of any person or concern to pay all or any portion of the contributions of an employer, required under this act from such employer, shall be valid. No employer shall directly or indirectly make or require or accept any deduction from the remuneration of any individual in his employ to finance the contributions of the employer required from him, or require or accept any waiver of any right hereunder by any individual in his employ.
No individual claiming benefits shall be charged fees of any kind in any proceeding under this act by the commission or its representatives or by any court or any officer thereof. Any individual claiming benefits in any proceeding before the commission or a court may be represented by counsel or other duly authorized agent; but no such counsel or agents shall either charge or receive for such services more than an amount approved by the commission.
Any employer may be represented in any proceeding before the commission by counsel or other duly authorized agent.
History: 1936, Ex. Sess., Act 1, Imd. Eff. Dec. 24, 1936 ;-- CL 1948, 421.31 ;-- Am. 1968, Act 338, Imd. Eff. July 19, 1968
Compiler's Notes:
Near the beginning of this section, “wave” evidently should read “waive.”
Notes of Decisions
State Bar of Mich. v. Galloway, 369 N.W.2d 839 (Mich. 1985).
· cites it 8× “The issue raised in these two cases is whether MCL 421.31; MSA 17.533 permits non-lawyers to represent employers in quasi-judicial proceedings before Michigan Employment Security Commission 1 referees.”
Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “" MCL 421.31. And the teacher tenure act provides: "No teacher may waive any rights and privileges under this act in any contract or agreement made with a controlling board.”
I. M. Dach Underwear Co. v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 80 N.W.2d 193 (Mich. 1956).
· cites it 4× “Section 31 of the Michigan employment security act (CL 1948, § 421.31 [Stat Ann 1950 Rev § 17.533]) forbids agreements by an individual to waive, release, or commute his rights under the statute.”
Park v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 94 N.W.2d 407 (Mich. 1959).
· cites it 2× “CL 1948, § 421.31 (Stat Ann 1950 Rev § 17.533); Michigan employment security commission appeal board Rule 12 (1954 AC, § R 421.”
Rushton v. Meijer, Inc., 570 N.W.2d 271 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “§ 421.31; M.S.A. § 17.533. Similarly, when enacting the Worker's Disability Compensation Act, the Legislature provided that no agreement by an employee to waive his rights to compensation under the worker's compensation act before an injury shall be valid.”
Staple v. Staple, 616 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
“10 MCL 421.31; MSA 17.533. 11 MCL 38.172; MSA 15.”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Vulcan Forging Co., 134 N.W.2d 749 (Mich. 1965).
· cites it 2× “NOTES [*] Since claimants were entitled to unemployment compensation benefits by the express provisions of section 48 of the act, they could not by any agreement waive their right to such benefits: "No agreement by an individual to waive, release, or commute his rights to…”
Edelberg v. Leco Corp., 599 N.W.2d 785 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
“[MCL 421.31; MSA 17.533 (mesa).] Accordingly, plaintiff did not exercise a right conferred by statute when he refused to sign the Last Chance Agreement.”
Gen. Motors Corp. v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 135 N.W.2d 921 (Mich. 1965).
· cites it 4× “If that is the effect of said contract provision, is it valid under the statute? Claimants say not, because of the provisions of section 31 of the act (CL 1948, § 421.31 [Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 17.533]) which reads, in part, as follows: "No agreement by an individual to waive,…”
Gen. Motors Corp. v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 142 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. 1966).
· cites it 2× “It is my judgment that Justice BLACK was right in concluding that paragraph 118 of the collective bargaining agreement between General Motors and the claimants' union cannot be given the effect contended for it by General Motors without violation of section 31 of the employment…”
Butler v. City of Newaygo, 320 N.W.2d 401 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “MCL 421.31; MSA 17.533 provides in part that, "No individual claiming benefits shall be charged fees of any kind in any proceeding under this act by the commission or its representatives or by any court or any officer thereof’.”
Applegate v. Palladium Publ'g Co., 290 N.W.2d 128 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).
“” 1 The MESC argues that, if the collective bargaining agreement is considered a binding agreement by plaintiff to voluntarily terminate his employment with Palladium at retirement age, the agreement is void as contrary to MCL 421.31; MSA 17.533, which provides in pertinent…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.