11 code 180 single account active worksites

© 2019 - State of Utah - Department of Technology Services
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Single Account / Active Worksites - Code 180

This edit is almost indistinguishable from the Code 179 edit exception just described. The only twist here is that the active worksites are indeed tied to an active account, but that account possesses the wrong MEEI code. Anything other than a ‘2’ in the master’s MEEI code (that is valid for a non-worksite) will be flagged here. That means that standard single accounts (MEEI = ‘1’), refusals (MEEI = ‘4’), and non-breakouts due to low secondary employment (MEEI = ‘6’) are all incompatible with active worksites.


Supposedly, this condition indicates that the MEEI code needs to be adjusted, but it could also mean that the worksites have been set up with an incorrect U-I root account number. Employers that have steadfastly refused to provide worksite details (identified with the MEEI set to ‘4’) are known to have worksites, but they should have been deleted from the Micro File when notice had been served by the employer (whether directly or by continual ignorance of the MWR forms). Those employers with an MEEI code of ‘6’, on the other hand, are generally willing to supply worksite detail, but the employment of other locations is so sparse that the QCEW unit (or BLS directives) had decided it wasn’t worth the time it took to load the fewer than 10 total employee in all of the secondary locations. If that decision had been made, the worksites should disappear in the same manner as the MEEI ‘4’ employers. A standard, run-of-the-mill single account (MEEI = ‘1’) is the most likely to be an MEEI code error. Yet, this should be a rarity, since these situations are checked and corrected during IMT processing in the ES2MI01 program.


If worksites are found for a single (or master-treated-as-a-single) account, a detail line on the Warnings Report will identify the supposed master with the somewhat choppy message, “Single Account/Active Worksites”. This warning message is also considered a “gross” error, with sufficient size of the family’s employment and/or wage values. BLS classification: A.2.8 or B.2.9, based on family employment or wage size.


Related Links