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

HEIDI K BANNISTER, Employee

ISLAND TROPICS & HAIR DESIGN LLC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 10402844AP


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 eligible for benefits beginning in week 22 of 2010, if otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed December 27, 2010
bannihe . usd : 145 : 6 PC 735 ; PC 740

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairperson

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

/s/ Ann L. Crump, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employer has petitioned for commission review of the adverse appeal tribunal decision. The employer states that it would like another hearing in order to prove that the employee lied at the hearing. The employer states it would be able to prove that the employee had another job while still employed with the employer and that the ending of her employment had nothing to do with her daughter's illness. However, the commission generally does not hold further hearings but reviews the record made by the ALJ. While the commission does have the discretion to order additional hearings, that discretion is exercised in only a few exceptional circumstances. The employer has not demonstrated that she has any new evidence, which she was unable, with the exercise of reasonable diligence, to present at the hearing. The employee informed the adjudicator that she did not have another job lined up. In addition, the employee told the adjudicator she did not report to work because her child was sick. Thus, the employer should have been aware, prior to the hearing, that it needed to present evidence to rebut the employee's position. Because the employer had the opportunity to present this evidence at the hearing but failed to do so, the commission will not remand this matter for further hearing.


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


uploaded 2011/01/14