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 MU-CHIAN CHANG, Appellant. Norman Wolgin, Respondent. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 6, 2003, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant was employed as an executive steward at a resort hotel and his responsibilities included approving the time records of his subordinates. Claimant was discharged from his employment after it was discovered that he was altering the times punched on his subordinates' time cards to reflect their scheduled work times rather than their actual arrival and departure times. It is well settled that an employee's falsification of time records may constitute misconduct (see Matter of Kelly [Commissioner of Labor], 288 A.D.2d 539, 731 N.Y.S.2d 811 [2001] ). Here, claimant not only was counseled about complying with company policies and procedures, but was told by both the payroll manager and another director-who, claimant was aware, recently discharged another manager for similar conduct-that changing subordinates' time cards to reflect different arrival and departure times was not permitted. Claimant's denial that he was informed that such changes were prohibited and had been trained to alter the time sheets presented a credibility issue for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see Matter of Sonzogni [Gilmor Glassworks-Commissioner of Labor], 301 A.D.2d 939, 753 N.Y.S.2d 630 [2003]; Matter of Trahan [Commissioner of Labor], 273 A.D.2d 664, 711 N.Y.S.2d 348 [2000] ). Claimant's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
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: May 13, 2004
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)