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

LAURIE FASBENDER, Employee

DISTRIBUTION SERVICES INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 02200860EC


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 ineligible for benefits beginning in week 9 of 2002, and until four weeks have elapsed since the end of the week of quitting and the employee has earned wages in covered employment performed after the week of quitting equaling at least four times the employee's weekly benefit rate which would have been paid had the quitting not occurred.

Dated and mailed August 1, 2002
fasbela . usd : 145 : 1  VL 1039.09 

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

/s/ Laurie R. McCallum, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In her petition for commission review the employee asserts that she believes that she does meet one of the exceptions to quitting which would allow immediate benefit payment. The employee asserts that she quit a part-time job because it was economically unfeasible for her to continue working that job after losing her full-time job. The employee was laid off from a full-time position. The employee did not indicate at the hearing that she quit her job with the employer because it was economically unfeasible, however. The employee stated that she quit because she could not find a childcare for her young son.

The employee correctly points out that there is a test to determine economic unfeasibility set forth in Wis. Admin. Code. § DWD 132.03(3)(b). Further, the employee correctly points out that childcare expenses are considered reasonable work-related expenses. Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 132.03(1)(a). See also Amy M. Kuhlman v. Kirlins of Wisconsin (LIRC, March 29, 2002). However, the record does not establish that the employee had any child care expenses. The employee did not state how much she paid her boyfriend to watch her son. She also did not mention how much her travel or other work-related expenses were. The employee, in her petition, mentions only childcare expenses, but does not indicate whether the employee had travel expenses or other expenses related to her part-time job. The employee indicates in her petition that she would have to begin paying for a sitter, and states that her boyfriend had been providing free child care. However, the code provides that the employee's wages from the week preceding the week she quit her part-time work are to be considered. In addition, the employee must also deduct the expenses incurred in that same week. In this case, the employee is not asserting that she had expenses in the week prior to her quitting her job with the employer that made it economically unfeasible for her to continue. The employee instead asserts that she was going to have expenses that would make it economically unfeasible to continue working, but she quit prior to incurring those expenses.

The employee further asserts that she quit because the employer would not give her enough hours to qualify for health insurance. However, the ALJ did not credit the employee's testimony that the employer had promised the employee that she would work 30 hours per week and be eligible for insurance benefits when the policy indicates that the employee needed to work at least 35 hours a week in order to be eligible for benefits. While it is understandable that the employee would have liked to work more hours and to have benefits, the employer's failure to provide those things did not give the employee good cause attributable to the employer for quitting.

cc: 
Woos Pagoda Restaurant
Attorney Brian H. Wright


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


uploaded 2002/08/09