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

SUSANNE M BEVINEAU, Employee

CORPORATE SERVICES INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 06004536JV


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 makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The employee worked for about two months as a receptionist for a client of the employer, a temporary employment agency. Her last day of work was March 2, 2006 (week 9).

The initial issue to be decided is whether the employee quit or was discharged. If the employee quit, a secondary issue is whether the employee's quitting was for any reason that would permit the immediate payment of unemployment benefits. If the employee was discharged, a secondary issue is whether the employee's discharge was for misconduct connected with that employment.

The employer had an agreement with the client employer that any temporary workers the employer placed with the client employer would become permanent employees of the client employer if they successfully completed 240 hours of work with the client employer. The employer placed the employee with the client employer as a receptionist. After 240 hours the employee became a permanent employee of the client employer. She was asked to sign a resignation letter by the employer and did so.

The employer contended that the employee voluntarily quit when she decided to become a permanent employee of the client employer rather than continue to work with it. That commission disagrees.

"The commission has previously dealt with situations such as this where a temporary agency has an agreement with a client that allows the client to hire the employee after a designated period of time. The employer must establish both that the employer had additional work available that the employee could have performed with another client and that the employee was aware that she could decline to accept employment with the client and continue such work with the employer." Parish v. Adecco Employment Services, Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 99003656BO (LIRC Feb. 28, 2000). In this case, the employer did not inform the employee that she had the option to continue working with the employer if she refused the position with the client. Since she was not aware that she could continue working for the employer, her action in becoming a permanent worker of the client and signing a resignation letter for the employer, as instructed by the employer, did not indicate an intention to quit.

The commission therefore finds that in week 9 of 2006, the employee did not voluntarily terminate work with the employing unit, within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(7)(a).

The commission further finds that in week 9 of 2006, the employee was discharged by the employer, within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(5) and that this discharge was not for misconduct connected with the employee's work within the meaning of that section.

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is modified to conform to the above findings and as modified, is affirmed. Accordingly, the employee is eligible for benefits beginning in week 9 of 2006, if otherwise qualified

Dated and mailed March 16, 2007
bevinsu . urr : 145 : 8  VL 1007  VL 1025

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairman

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The commission modified the ALJ's decision to reflect the commission's view of the manner in which the employee's employment ended.

 

cc: Corporate Services, Inc. - Janesville, WI


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


uploaded 2007/03/19