Florida Department of Commerce proposes a flat 12-week disqualification for discharges for serious or extreme misconduct
As of our last check on November 3, 2026, this has been withdrawn.
We check the Florida Administrative Register daily for later notices on this rule.
In short
- What changed
- The Florida Department of Commerce proposes cutting the weeks of disqualification after a discharge for misconduct to 12 weeks, for both extreme misconduct (now 27 to 52 weeks) and serious misconduct (now 13 to 26 weeks). The proposal leaves the listed types of serious misconduct unchanged.
- Who's affected
- Former employees whose discharge is found to be for misconduct connected with work, and the Florida employers that discharged them. The notice sets no limit by employer size, type or industry.
- What to do
- This proposed rule creates no new duties for employers. If you want a public hearing, or want to send cost information or a lower cost alternative, the notice gives 21 days from its date.
What changed
-
From the source73B-11.020(1)
(1) Extreme misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 27 to 52] weeks of disqualification. Extreme misconduct occurs when the claimant commits a felony in connection with work.
The proposal would set 12 weeks of disqualification for extreme misconduct, replacing the current range of 27 to 52 weeks. Extreme misconduct is when the claimant commits a felony in connection with work.
-
From the source73B-11.020(2)
(2) Serious misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 13 to 26] weeks of disqualification.
The proposal would set 12 weeks of disqualification for serious misconduct, replacing the current range of 13 to 26 weeks.
-
From the source73B-11.020(2)
(a) No change.
Also: 73B-11.020(3)
(3) No change.
The list of conduct that counts as serious misconduct (paragraphs (2)(a) through (2)(d)) and paragraph (3) of the rule would not change.
-
From the sourceSUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION
The Agency has determined that this will not have an adverse impact on small business or likely increase directly or indirectly regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate within one year after the implementation of the rule.
Also: SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION
The Agency has determined that the proposed rule is not expected to require legislative ratification
The agency found the proposal will not have an adverse impact on small business or raise regulatory costs above $200,000 in the aggregate within one year, did not prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs, and does not expect it to need legislative ratification.
Who is affected
-
From the source73B-11.020
When it is determined a discharge was for misconduct connected with work, the following weeks of disqualification apply:
The disqualification periods apply when it is determined that a claimant's discharge was for misconduct connected with work.
-
Our analysisHeading
Division of Workforce Services
Also: 73B-11.020
When it is determined a discharge was for misconduct connected with work, the following weeks of disqualification apply:
AmendSignal reads this as affecting former employees who file claims with the Florida Department of Commerce's Division of Workforce Services after being fired for misconduct, and the employers that discharged them. The notice does not limit it by employer size, type or industry.
What it means in practice
-
Our analysisPURPOSE AND EFFECT
The proposed rule amendment changes the amount of weeks of disqualification for extreme misconduct and serious misconduct to 12 weeks.
If adopted, a worker fired for a work-related felony or for serious misconduct would face a shorter and fixed disqualification period, so such former employees could become eligible sooner than under the current ranges.
-
Our analysis73B-11.020(1)
(1) Extreme misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 27 to 52] weeks of disqualification.
Also: 73B-11.020(2)
(2) Serious misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 13 to 26] weeks of disqualification.
Extreme and serious misconduct would carry the same 12-week disqualification, so the difference between the two categories would no longer change the length of disqualification.
What to do
Required
This is a proposed rule. It creates no requirement for employers, and the rule text itself places no duty on employers.
Worth considering
-
Our suggestionSUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION
Any person who wishes to provide information regarding a statement of estimated regulatory costs, or provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative must do so in writing within 21 days of this notice.
If you have information on regulatory costs or a lower cost alternative, consider sending it in writing to the contact named in the notice within the 21-day window.
-
Our suggestionHearing
IF REQUESTED WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A HEARING WILL BE SCHEDULED AND ANNOUNCED IN THE FAR.
If you want to be heard on the proposal, consider requesting a hearing within 21 days of the notice; the agency says it will schedule one if asked.
-
Our suggestion73B-11.020(1)
(1) Extreme misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 27 to 52] weeks of disqualification.
Also: 73B-11.020(2)
(2) Serious misconduct will warrant [added: 12] [deleted: 13 to 26] weeks of disqualification.
Consider tracking the proposal and, if it is adopted, updating any internal guidance or training that describes disqualification ranges of 27 to 52 weeks or 13 to 26 weeks after a misconduct discharge.
Open questions
The source leaves these open. We'll update this record if a later document answers them.
-
On what calendar date does the 21-day window to request a hearing or submit cost information close?
-
Would the shorter disqualification period affect employers' accounts or tax rates?
History
-
Notice of Change/Withdrawal/Correction: Determinations Regarding Discharge for Misconduct Source (opens in a new tab)
-
Notice of Proposed Rule: Determinations Regarding Discharge for Misconduct Source (opens in a new tab)
-
Notice of Rule Development: Development 73B-11.020 Source (opens in a new tab)