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

LINDA R HENNING, Employee

MARSHALL ARES EMS, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 03002110MD


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 employer's request for hearing on the merits is dismissed. The initial determination shall remain in effect.

Dated and mailed September 18, 2003
hennili . usd : 164 : 1  PC 711

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James T. Flynn, Commissioner

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In its petition for commission review the employer argues that it acted prudently to preserve its rights by appealing the initial determination as soon as possible. The employer explains that it is a public body, which is governed by a commission composed of representatives from the participating municipalities, and that by statute it cannot take action without holding a legally scheduled meeting. It maintains that, in the absence of any action by its commission, no one had authority to file an appeal. The employer contends that its commission met in a special meeting as soon as it was possible to get all of its members together, and that the appeal was as timely as possible under the circumstances. It maintains that the initial determination was received the day after the last regular meeting of the commission, and it was simply impossible to get the commission members together to meet any sooner. The employer's arguments fail. As was noted in the appeal tribunal decision, there is no reason to believe the employer received the initial determination in anything other than a timely manner. The initial determination clearly indicated that it would become final unless an appeal were filed by a date certain, and the employer was on notice that it had to act by that date in order to preserve its rights. Even accepting that the employer's commission had to meet in order to approve the filing of an appeal, there is no reason to believe this could not have been accomplished in a timely manner, particularly where it appears that only three board members were needed for a quorum. Under all the facts and circumstances, the commission is unpersuaded that the employer's appeal was late due to any reason beyond its control. Accordingly, the appeal tribunal decision is affirmed.

cc: Attorney Mark B. Hazelbaker


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


uploaded 2003/09/23