IN RE: the Claim of Helene STEHNACH

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

IN RE: the Claim of Helene STEHNACH, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Decided: May 21, 2009

Before:  CARDONA, P.J., PETERS, ROSE, KANE and KAVANAGH, JJ. Helene Stehnach, Rego Park, appellant pro se. Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York City (Linda D. Joseph of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 14, 2008, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause.

 Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause.  “A claimant who refuses to accept a job for which he or she is reasonably suited by training and experience will be disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits” (Matter of Guzenski [Commissioner of Labor], 20 A.D.3d 801, 802, 798 N.Y.S.2d 580 [2005] [citations omitted];  see Matter of Schirra [Commissioner of Labor], 45 A.D.3d 1067, 1068, 846 N.Y.S.2d 419 [2007];  Matter of Kurtz [Rush Henrietta Cent. School Dist.-Commissioner of Labor], 37 A.D.3d 895, 896, 829 N.Y.S.2d 721 [2007] ).   Here, claimant, who previously held a number of administrative positions involving “varying degrees of data entry,” refused a temporary position as a data entry clerk due to “the tiresome repetitious nature of the work.”   Having performed similar work in the past, claimant was qualified for the proffered position (see Matter of Schirra [Commissioner of Labor], 45 A.D.3d at 1068, 846 N.Y.S.2d 419), and neither her dislike of that type of work nor her stated desire to wait for a better opportunity constitutes good cause for refusing an offer of suitable employment (cf. Matter of De Marco [Commissioner of Labor], 9 A.D.3d 732, 779 N.Y.S.2d 836 [2004] ).   Accordingly, the Board's decision is affirmed.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Copied to clipboard