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


THRESA A CONNELLY, Employe

MORROW MEMORIAL HOME FOR THE AGED INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 99001340LX


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 employe is eligible for benefits in week 9 of 1999, if otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed July 16, 1999
conneth.usd : 105 : 3 AA 110

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

Pamela I. Anderson, Commissioner

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner


MEMORANDUM OPINION

The commission has affirmed the appeal tribunal decision in this case, for the following reasons. First, although the employer believed the employe was intentionally avoiding it, the preponderance of the evidence in the record suggests otherwise. There is no evidence in the record to suggest, as the employer argues, that the employe knew the employer was trying to contact her. The employe's unrebutted testimony was that her caller ID service was broken. Second, had the employe not wished to work for the employer that week, she would not have left a note with the employer indicating that she was off that week from her other employment. Third, the simple fact that the employe had a doctor's appointment during the week in question does not require the inference that she was not available to work that week.

The employer argues that its telephone calls to the employe's residence constituted "due notice" of work available. Indeed, actual notice is not always required of work available if the method used is fairly and reasonably calculated to accomplish the notice. The method of notice cannot be such, though, that employes are required to "keep adjacent with their phones, though all the work hours of the day and through all the work days of the week." DWD Unemployment Insurance Manual, Vol. 3, Part VII, Ch. 3, sec. F, p. 4.

For theses reasons, and those stated in the appeal tribunal decision, the commission has affirmed that decision.


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