LOWER APPEALS DECISION
|DECISION DATE: August 17, 1993
|CLAIMANT: Karen V. Wilson
||APPEAL NO.: 9314836
|EMPLOYER: Butler and Associates
||L. O. NO.: 43
Issue: Whether the claimant left work voluntarily, without good
cause, within the meaning of the Code of Maryland, Labor
and Employment Article, Title 8, Section 1001. Whether
the appealing party filed a timely appeal or had good
cause for an appeal filed late within the meaning of the
Code of Maryland, Labor and Employment Article, Title 8, Section 806.
- NOTICE OF RIGHT TO FURTHER APPEAL -
Any party may request a further appeal either in person or
by mail which maybe filed in any local office of the Department
of Economic and Employment Development, or with the Board
of Appeals, Room 515, 1100 North Eutaw Street, Baltimore,
MD 21201. Your appeal must be filed by September 1, 1993.
Note: Appeals filed by mail are considered timely on the date
of the U.S. Postal Service postmark.
|For the Claimant:
||For the Employer:
Present Vincent A. Butler
FINDINGS OF FACT
A Benefit Determination mailed to the parties provides that
the last day to file a timely appeal was July 14, 1993.
In this case, the appeal was filed by mail on July 20,
1993 and received on July 21, 1993. The appellant offers
as a reason for the late appeal that he received notice
on July 16, 1993, after the appeal deadline had past.
He then mailed the appeal within a few days. The appeal
is deemed to be timely filed.
The claimant worked as a legal secretary for this employer
from April 5, 1993 until June 8, 1993, earning a wage
of $26,000.00 a year. She worked fill time.
When the claimant was hired, the employer's law office was
located in Gaithersburg, Maryland, just a short distance
from the claimant's home. The drive from home to office
took approximately five minutes. On May 30, 1993, the
employer relocated his law office to Calverton, Maryland.
The new office location is only a 20-minute drive from
the Gaithersburg location. At the time of the change,
the employer invited the claimant and other office personnel
to join the firm at its new location.
The claimant quit his employment rather than relocate, because
she wanted a job in her immediate neighborhood to be near
her children in case they needed her. The claimant worked
approximately two weeks in Calverton during the transition period.
Throughout the claimant's employment, she traveled to and from work
in her own vehicle.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The appellant had good cause for filing a late appeal within
the meaning of Maryland Code, Title 8, Section 806.
The Maryland Code, Labor and Employment Article, Title 8,
Section 1001, provides that an individual shall be disqualified
for benefits where his unemployment is due to leaving
work voluntarily, without good cause arising from or connected
with the conditions of employment or actions of the employer.
The preponderance of the credible evidence in the record
will support a conclusion that the claimant voluntarily
separated from employment, without good cause, within
the meaning of Title 8, Section 1001.
EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE
In the instant case, the claimant severely restricted the
geographical area in which she was willing to work. Her
reason was to be near her children in case they needed
her. This is purely a personal reason, not arising from
or connected with the conditions of employment or actions
of the employer. The claimant quit employment without
good cause. When a separation is caused by a voluntary
quit, the burden of proof is on the claimant to show good
cause or valid circumstances. In this case, the claimant
was not present and there is no evidence to support a
conclusion that the claimant's separation was precipitated
by another cause of such a necessitous or compelling nature
that the claimant had no reasonable alternative but to
leave the employment. There is no showing of valid circumstances.
The appellant had good cause for filing a late appeal under
Maryland Code, Title 8, Section 806.
The claimant left work voluntarily, without good cause, within
the meaning of Maryland Code, Title 8, Section 1001. Benefits
are denied for the week beginning June 6, 1993, and until
she becomes reemployed, earns at least fifteen times her
weekly benefit amount in covered employment, and thereafter
becomes unemployed through no fault of her own.
The determination of the Claims Examiner is reversed.
C. White, ESQ., Hearing Examiner
Date of hearing: August 9, 1993
cd/Specialist ID: 43719
Seq. No. :005
Copies mailed on August 17, 1993 to:
KAREN V. WILSON
BUTLER AND ASSOCIATES
LOCAL OFFICE #43