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


CAROL J JAMES, Employe

AMAAN INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 98002943JV


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 the applicable law, records and evidence in this case, the commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The employe last worked as a baker for approximately 24 years. Her last day of work was May 27, 1998 (week 22), when that employment ended because the employer transferred the business to new owners. The new owners offered the employe continued employment. She refused to accept the employment.

In her previous employment, the employe had performed baking and some management responsibilities. She was scheduled to work 4 shifts per week for eight hours each shift, she was paid $10 per hour for 32 hours of work per week. She was very fast at her job and she was paid for the 8 hours even if she was able to accomplish her work in less time.

The new owner indicated he would offer her work on the day he took over the business and they discussed it the following week. He offered a job working Thursday through Sunday as a baker. He told her she would have no further money responsibilities and he would pay her only for baking. He estimated this would consist of 4-6 hours per shift or 16 to 24 hours per week. There is a dispute as to whether wages were discussed. The employer stated that they did not discuss wages but he intended to pay her the same wage. The employe states that he offered her $8 per hour.

The employe refused the job because she would not accept a reduction in hours with a pay cut. She also believed that her employment would not be continued beyond the employer's planned remodeling in July.

The labor market report in the record states that a substantially less favorable wage for similar work in the labor market would be $7.17 per hour or less. The labor market report further indicates that only the lowest quartile or 22.30 percent of similar work is performed part time, defined as fewer than 32 hours per week. Since the employer offered no more than 24 hours of work per week, the job offer was substantially less favorable as to the number of hours. The employe raised this reduction in hours as one of her objections to the offer.

The commission therefore concludes that the employe had good cause to refuse the offer of work due to its consisting of substantially less favorable part time work.

The commission therefore finds that in week 23 of 1998, the employe failed to accept an offer of work, within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(8)(a), but that the wages, hours(including arrangement and number) or other conditions of that work were substantially less favorable to the employe than those prevailing for similar work in the labor market and that, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 108.04(9), benefits shall not be denied.

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is reversed. Accordingly, the employe is eligible for benefits beginning in week 23 of 1998, if she is otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed: November 6, 1998
jamesca.urr : 178 : 1 SW 844  SW 855

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

Pamela I. Anderson, Commissioner

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The commission's reversal was not based on any differing assessment of witness credibility. The commission has reached a different conclusion when applying the law to essentially the same set of facts.


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