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 Suzanne SMITH, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 22, 2006, which, among other things, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant, a manager in the employer's frame shop, testified that she quit her job because the employer reduced her work hours and would no longer provide her with a paid lunch break due to her reduced hours. The case law makes clear, however, that “[d]issatisfaction with one's work schedule or a reduction in work hours does not constitute good cause for leaving one's employment” (Matter of Ubl [Commissioner of Labor ], 45 A.D.3d 1021, 1022, 845 N.Y.S.2d 853 [2007]; see Matter of Battiste [Commissioner of Labor ], 48 A.D.3d 866, 851 N.Y.S.2d 291 [2008]; Matter of Florio [Commissioner of Labor ], 47 A.D.3d 1190, 850 N.Y.S.2d 697 [2008] ). Further, the record reflects that claimant took no steps to protect her employment prior to quitting (see Matter of Ubl [Commissioner of Labor ], 45 A.D.3d at 1022, 845 N.Y.S.2d 853). To the extent that claimant and the employer offered conflicting accounts of the hours that claimant was willing to work and the circumstances under which she left her employment, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Battiste [Commissioner of Labor ], 48 A.D.3d at 866, 851 N.Y.S.2d 291).
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: August 07, 2008
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)