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

DENISE FARMER, Employee

COUNTY OF BROWN, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 07402716GB


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 45 of 2007, and until seven weeks have elapsed since the end of the week of discharge and the employee has earned wages in covered employment performed after the week of discharge equaling at least 14 times the employee's weekly benefit rate which would have been paid had the discharge not occurred.

Dated and mailed March 6, 2008
farmede . usd : 132 : 1 PC 714.10   MC 630.20

James T. Flynn, Chairperson

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

/s/ Ann L. Crump, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employee has petitioned for commission review of the adverse appeal tribunal decision which found that the employer discharged the employee for misconduct connected with her work for the employer. The employee presented no evidence to establish that she omitted her most recent employer because of her psychological condition. It is not enough to allege a potential relationship between a psychological condition and conduct. The employee must establish through medical evidence that the psychological condition caused the behavior that led to the discharge. See Lindberger v. LIRC, No. 00-CV-1798 (Wis. Cir. Ct. Dane County Mar. 29, 2001).

The employer is entitled to ask a potential hire for her employment history. The employer is also entitled to expect that a potential hire will provide truthful information on the employment application. The employer testified that if it had known that the employee had been discharged from the employment she did not list on her application, it believed that would have been a determining factor in whether it would have hired the employee. The omission was material.

Further, the employee did not only lie on her application. When questioned at her interview regarding what she had been doing since September of 2006, when the last listed employment relationship had ended, the employee said she had not been working.

 


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


uploaded 2008/03/17