STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)


JUDITH A AUBUCHON, Employe

DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES SERVICE CENTER INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 97601591KN


An administrative law judge (ALJ) for the Division of Unemployment Insurance of the Department of Workforce Development issued a decision in this matter. A timely petition for review was filed.

The commission has considered the petition and the positions of the parties, and it has reviewed the evidence submitted to the ALJ. Based on the applicable law, records and evidence in this case, the commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The employe worked for about four years, as an early childhood special education teacher for the employer, a disability service center. Her last day of work was on October 25, 1996 (week 43), when she quit.

The issue to be decided is whether the employe's quitting was for any reason that would permit the immediate payment of benefits.

The employe's supervisor was terminated in August of 1996, and the employe no longer had a supervisor. The employe was dissatisfied with the supervisor's termination, and concerned that she had been signing legal documents, among other things, with no direct supervision. The employe was upset by the employer's failure to attempt to fill the supervisory position. The employe was concerned with the budget deficit, which she testified affected the programs the children were getting. There was no money to purchase equipment, the employer was losing staff, and there were gaps in service. The employe believed that the employer's incentive program was unfair to some of the workers. She and several co-workers attempted to meet with the employer's board of directors to discuss these and other employment related matters. The board refused to meet with the employe and directed her to deal with the employer's executive director.

A county government funds 90 percent of the employer's budget. The employe and several co-workers wrote a letter stating their concerns to the county agency which funded the employer. In response the executive director informed the staff that the board would not meet with the employes. In response, the employe gave notice of quitting.

The employe contended that her quitting was with good cause attributable to the employer because the board would not address any of the workers' complaints. The commission agrees. While, as pointed out by the ALJ, the board was not obligated to discuss these concerns with the employe, the employer's firm refusal to meet with workers over apparently valid issues affecting the agency and the employes employment was unreasonable, given the fact that it would have taken the employer little time to meet with the workers, and in fact, the employer was directed to do so by the county which funded it. There are a number of things, including staffing matters, such as the discharge of the supervisor, which are in the prerogative of management, and the employer's refusal to allow the workers to dictate staffing issues would certainly not give rise to good cause attributable to the employer for quitting. Even the employer's failure to address all of a worker's concerns would not give rise to good cause attributable to the employer for quitting. However, the failure of the employer to discuss the valid employment related concerns of the workers, under the circumstances in this case, was not reasonable. The employer's actions toward the employe during 1996 justified her decision to terminate her employment with the employer.

The commission therefore finds that in week 43 of 1996, the employe terminated work with the employer with good cause attributable to the employer within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(7)(b).

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is reversed. Accordingly, the employe is eligible for benefits beginning in week 43 of 1996, if she is otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed: January 27, 1998
aubucju.urr : 145 : 5  VL 1005

Pamela I. Anderson, Chairman

/s/ David B. Falstad, Commissioner

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The commission did not discuss witness credibility and demeanor with the ALJ but reverses his decision because it reached a different legal conclusion when applying the law to the facts of this case.


[ Search UC Decisions ] - [ UC Digest - Main Index ] - [ UC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]