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

LUIS C GOMEZ, Employee

STOUGHTON TRAILERS INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 01002615MD


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 its review, the commission agrees with the decision of the ALJ, and it adopts the findings and conclusion in that decision as its own.

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is affirmed. Accordingly, the employee is eligible for benefits beginning in week 12 of 2001, if otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed November 2, 2001
gomezlu . usd : 132 : 8   VL 1034 

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employer argues that the employee cannot take advantage of Wis. Stat. § § 108.04(8)(d) and 108.04(7)(e) because he never raised the issue of the lower grade of skill of the position as a reason for leaving. The employer cites Schepp v. LIRC, No. 81-CV-405 (Wis. Cir. Ct. Marathon County Dec. 15, 1981), for the proposition that the employee must raise his dissatisfaction with the skill level of the position as a reason for quitting. The commission disagrees.

The Schepp decision was issued in 1981. Effective January 4, 1998, Wis. Stat. § § 108.04(8)(d) and (7)(e) were amended to specifically state that an employee has good cause to refuse work under (8)(d) or quit under (7)(e), regardless of the reason articulated for the refusal. Wis. Stat. § 108.04 (7)(e) now provides "for purposes of this paragraph, an employee has the same good cause for voluntarily terminating work if the employee could have failed to accept the work under sub. (8)(d) when it was offered, regardless of the reason articulated by the employee for the termination." (Emphasis added.) The changes were made to allow benefits to an employee who refused work or accepted and then quit work during the canvassing period, if it was at a lower grade of skill or significantly lower rate of pay than his most recent position. The employee began the lower skilled position when in his canvassing period and quit while still in his canvassing period. Regardless of the reason articulated by the employee for quitting, he had the same good cause for quitting as he would have had for refusing the work.

cc: Attorney Amy O. Bruchs


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


uploaded 2001/11/05