IN RE: the Claim of Samuel LANDY

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

IN RE: the Claim of Samuel LANDY, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Decided: July 22, 2004

Before:  CARDONA, P.J., MERCURE, SPAIN, MUGGLIN and KANE, JJ. Samuel Landy, Monsey, appellant pro se. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York City (Linda D. Joseph of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 11, 2003, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

 Claimant left his employment as a car salesperson because he was dissatisfied with the amount of money he was earning and the final commission he received.   The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, reversing a decision of the Administrative Law Judge, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.   We affirm.   It is well settled that dissatisfaction with one's wages does not constitute good cause for leaving employment (see Matter of Bollweg [Commissioner of Labor], 288 A.D.2d 811, 733 N.Y.S.2d 765 [2001];  Matter of De John [Commissioner of Labor], 275 A.D.2d 848, 713 N.Y.S.2d 238 [2000] ).   Here, the record establishes that there had been no change in the commission rates that the employer paid to its employees.   Moreover, claimant failed to bring his concerns regarding his last commission payment to the employer's attention.   Inasmuch as the record establishes that continuing work was available to claimant, the Board's decision will not be disturbed (see Matter of Schachtman [Commissioner of Labor], 286 A.D.2d 790, 790, 729 N.Y.S.2d 807 [2001], lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 607, 738 N.Y.S.2d 290, 764 N.E.2d 394 [2001] ).

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Copied to clipboard