IN RE: the Claim of Ida THOMPSON (2000)

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 9, 1999, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from her employment as a home health aide for violating the employer's work policy regarding patient care.   The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she was terminated due to misconduct.   We affirm.   Substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant engaged in disqualifying misconduct.   It is well settled that “[f]ailing to comply with the employer's established policies and procedures and acting in a manner contrary to the employer's best interests [can] constitute disqualifying misconduct” (Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 A.D.2d 818, 818, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1025;  see, Matter of Richards, 261 A.D.2d 678, 679, 689 N.Y.S.2d 542).   Here, the Board found, based on witness testimony, that claimant exposed the employer to liability by escorting a patient to another state where claimant was not certified after the employer instructed her not to do so and also spoke in an abusive and offensive manner at the patient's home.   Although claimant denied the allegations of wrongdoing, the conflicting testimony presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Singh, 273 A.D.2d 664, 711 N.Y.S.2d 350;  Matter of Creary [Commissioner of Labor], 254 A.D.2d 644, 644-645, 679 N.Y.S.2d 187).

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.