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

MARY E. NEWBOLD, Employee

KELLY SERVICES INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 03609188RC


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 32 of 2003, 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. The employee is required to repay the sum of $192 to the Unemployment Reserve Fund.

Dated and mailed March 26, 2004
newboma . usd : 132 : 3  VL 1007.01  VL 1025 

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

James T. Flynn, Commissioner

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employee has petitioned for commission review of the appeal tribunal decision that found she voluntarily terminated her employment but not for any reason permitting immediate benefit payment. The commission has reviewed the record in this matter and agrees with the administrative law judge's findings and conclusions. The employee sets forth in her petition her complaints regarding the actions of co-workers and supervisory personnel. The employee was unhappy with office gossip, the volume at which a co-worker played a radio, and the supervisor's response to her complaint. The record simply does not reflect that the actions of the employee's co-workers or supervisory personnel were so egregious that she was required to terminate her employment. The employee did not give the employer the opportunity to address her concerns prior to terminating her employment. The employee has not established that she was unable to continue working in the temporary assignment until another assignment was found for her. The commission cannot conclude that a one-time assignment to move boxes provided her with good cause attributable to the employer for terminating her employment, particularly since the employee did not object to the employer when she was given such assignment.

The employee asserts that UI staff told her that her separation was a layoff. However, when the employee initiates a claim she is given the option to indicate whether she was discharged, quit or was laid off. The employee indicated she was laid off. The employee left the assignment knowing that the employer did not have another assignment for her. The employee was aware that her actions would result in her unemployment. The employee's actions constituted a voluntary termination of her employment for UI purposes whether or not the employee made subsequent contact with the employer.

The commission finds nothing in the record to support the employee's suggestion that the ALJ manipulated the volume and/or operation of the recording at the hearing to cover remarks that the ALJ made at the hearing.

For the above reasons, and for the reasons set forth in the appeal tribunal decision, the commission affirms that decision.

 


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


uploaded 2004/03/30