Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Dwight R. BOWEN, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 31, 2004, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant worked as a shuttle driver for a package delivery business. After the employer issued two warnings to claimant concerning his poor attendance, the employer requested him to provide a written performance plan for remedying this deficiency. When claimant failed to do so, he was terminated from his position. Claimant's application for unemployment insurance benefits ultimately was denied by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board on the ground that he lost his employment due to misconduct. He now appeals.
We affirm. An employee's failure to comply with an employer's reasonable request may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see Matter of Denton [Commissioner of Labor], 7 A.D.3d 869, 776 N.Y.S.2d 140 [2004]; Matter of Kaissar [Commissioner of Labor], 3 A.D.3d 829, 770 N.Y.S.2d 913 [2004] ). Here, the employer's response to claimant's attendance problem was reasonable and in accordance with the established policy for handling such matters. Substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant's failure to provide a performance plan amounted to misconduct. Claimant's assertion that he did not know how to devise an appropriate plan is belied by the fact that he was provided a sample and, in any event, presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Kaissar [Commissioner of Labor], supra at 830, 770 N.Y.S.2d 913; Matter of Chillious [Commissioner of Labor], 3 A.D.3d 655, 656, 770 N.Y.S.2d 766 [2004] ).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 07, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)