| BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION
DECISION NO: 1485-BH-92
DATE: August 27, 1992 |
|
| |
|
| CLAIMANT: William S. Foote |
APPEAL NO.: 9200023 |
| |
|
| EMPLOYER: T LB Associates, Inc. |
L.O. NO: 1 |
| |
|
| |
APPELLANT: Employer |
Issue: Whether the claimant left work voluntarily, without good
cause, within the meaning of Section 8-1001 of the Labor
and Employment Article.
- NOTICE OF RIGHT OF APPEAL TO COURT -
YOU MAY FILE AN APPEAL FROM THIS DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE LAWS OF MARYLAND. THE APPEAL MAY BE TAKEN IN PERSON
OR THROUGH AN ATTORNEY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALTIMORE
CITY, IF YOU RESIDE IN BALTIMORE CITY, OR THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE COUNTY IN MARYLAND IN WHICH YOU RESIDE.
THE PERIOD FOR FILING AN APPEAL EXPIRES September 26, 1992.
APPEARANCES
For the Claimant:
William Foote - Claimant |
For the Employer:
Thomas Brown - President
Palmer Stephenn Vice President
|
EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE
The Board of Appeals has considered all of the evidence presented,
including the testimony offered at the hearings. The Board
has also considered all of the documentary evidence introduced
in this case, as well as the Department of Economic and
Employment Development's documents in the appeal file.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The claimant was employed by this employer as a driller helper in April
of 1991. He earned $20.45 per hour. His last actual day
of work was July 3, 1991.
When the
claimant was first employed, he told the employer that
he had a driver's license. This was important, since most
of the employer's jobs required two employees, each of
whom needed to have a driver's license in order to operate
the employer's drilling equipment and truck. On some of
the employer's operations, however, three persons were
sent. In this case, it was acceptable for one of these
people not to have a driver's license.
Although the claimant told the employer that he had a driver's
license, it was also true that he had changed his address
without notifying the DMV while some driving charges were
pending against him. As a result, he lost his driver's
license while he was employed.
The employer, who had plenty of work for a worker of the claimant's
calibre who had a driver's license, could not offer the
claimant steady full-time work after he lost his license.
The claimant was offered work on various days, and he
worked some of these days after he lost his license. Eventually,
however, he left the employment without notifying the
employer and obtained a job elsewhere. Eventually, he
became unemployed again and applied for benefits.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Board
concludes that the claimant voluntarily quit his employment.
The employment which he was originally offered, which
required a driver's license, was still available on a
full-time basis at the time the claimant left the employment.
It is true that considerably less work was available for
the claimant after he lost his license. This fact, however,
was not the employer's fault. In the case of Lee v. Kimos
Althaphous, Inc. (781-BH-86), the Board ruled that, where
a claimant's hours were being cut back solely because
the claimant had stolen merchandise from the employer
and could not longer be trusted on the premises alone,
the claimant's resulting resignation was for neither a
good cause or a valid circumstance.
Although the claimant committed no crime against the employer in
this case, the parallel with the Lee case is that the
claimant's hours were reduced solely because of the claimant's
own conduct in losing his license. Although there was
considerably less work available, this was the fault of
the claimant. Under these conditions, the claimant's reason
for leaving is not considered to be either a good cause
or valid circumstances.
The decision
of the Hearing Examiner must be reversed, and the maximum
penalty must be applied.
DECISION
The unemployment of the claimant was due to leaving work voluntarily,
without good cause or valid circumstances, within the
meaning of Section 8-1001 of the Labor and Employment
Article. He is disqualified from receiving benefits from
the week beginning June 30, 1991 and until the claimant
becomes reemployed, earns at least ten times his weekly
benefit amount ($2,230.00) and thereafter becomes unemployed
through no fault of his own.
The decision of the Hearing Examiner is reversed.
Thomas W. Keech, Chairman
Donna P. Watts, Associate Member
K:D
kmb
DATE OF HEARING: June 16, 1992
COPIES MAILED TO:
CLAIMANT
EMPLOYER
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE - BALTIMORE
|
