IN RE: the Claim of William G. PEAK

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

IN RE: the Claim of William G. PEAK, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Decided: July 22, 2004

Before:  CARDONA, P.J., CREW III, CARPINELLO, MUGGLIN and KANE, JJ. William G. Peak, Garden City, appellant pro se. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York City (Bessie Bazile of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 6, 2003, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

 Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant voluntarily left his employment as a salesperson without good cause.   It is well settled that dissatisfaction with one's work load (see Matter of Rainville [Commissioner of Labor], 288 A.D.2d 747, 732 N.Y.S.2d 491 [2001] ) or work hours (see Matter of Chereshnev [Commissioner of Labor], 296 A.D.2d 804, 805, 745 N.Y.S.2d 497 [2002] ) does not constitute good cause for leaving employment.   Here, claimant testified that two months after the company was sold to a new employer, he quit his job because of the increase in his work load and hours.   Inasmuch as the record establishes that claimant failed to bring his concerns to the employer's attention prior to quitting (see id. at 805, 745 N.Y.S.2d 497;  Matter of Parmeter [Commissioner of Labor], 270 A.D.2d 552, 703 N.Y.S.2d 588 [2000], lv. denied 95 N.Y.2d 756, 712 N.Y.S.2d 448, 734 N.E.2d 760 [2000] ), and having reviewed claimant's remaining contentions, we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Copied to clipboard