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

CANDY M HEIMERL, Employee

ARIENS CO, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 07400772AP


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 8 of 2007, 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 atl eat four times the employee's weekly benefit rate which would have been paid had the qutitnig not occurred.

Dated and mailed July 24, 2007
heimec2 . usd : 132 : 1   VL 1016  VL 1039.01  VL 1080.26

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairman

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

/s/ Ann L. Crump, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employee has not set forth any argument in her petition challenging the findings and conclusions of the ALJ. The employee indicates that she needs no accommodations for the hearing. However, the commission does not hold hearings. Rather, the commission reviews the evidence presented at the hearing before the ALJ. The commission has reviewed the record and agrees with the ALJ that the employee quit her employment and not for any reason permitting immediate benefit payment.

The quit exception of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(7)(cm) allows for immediate benefit payment when a worker is hired to work a particular shift, and then quits because of a requirement by the employing unit that she transfer her working hours to a shift occurring at a time that would result in a lack of childcare for her minor children. The evidence does not demonstrate that the employee was hired to work a particular shift. The employee testified that she had worked several different shifts at the employer. The employer was moving the employee back to the shift on which she had previously worked. The employee's personal circumstances, not the employer's actions, are what caused the separation. The employee had been working at 5:30 a.m. again since December of 2006. She had worked that shift in the past. The employer could not control the fact that in late January of 2007 the employee no longer had childcare.



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


uploaded 2007/07/28