(DOWNLOAD) "Matter Claim Eugenia Mangi" by Supreme Court of New York # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Matter Claim Eugenia Mangi
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 25, 1980
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 59 KB
Description
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 23, 1979. Claimant was last employed as a permanent substitute teacher although she had previously been employed as a per diem substitute teacher. She filed for benefits on July 6, 1978 and on September 20, 1978 she was offered employment for one day as a per diem substitute teacher. She refused the proffered employment, indicating at the hearing that she did so because she did not want to work as a per diem substitute and also because the salary was less than in her previous employment. The board found that claimant had refused employment for which she was reasonably fitted by training and experience and that such refusal was for personal and noncompelling reasons. Consequently, she was disqualified from receiving benefits. The board also found that claimant was overpaid $954.25 in benefits and ruled them to be recoverable because she had made a false statement to the local office when she certified that she had not refused employment. This appeal ensued. There is no real question that claimant was reasonably fitted by training and experience for the proffered employment. Whether she had good cause for refusing the employment raises a factual question for the boards determination and if the decision of the board is supported by substantial evidence, it must be affirmed (Matter of Bruce [Levine], 51 A.D.2d 853). The fact that the proffered employment was not permanent is not a justifiable excuse (Matter of Walls [Catherwood], 26 A.D.2d 883; Matter of Kotlowitz [Catherwood], 24 A.D.2d 813). Claimants contention that she had good cause to refuse the employment because the wage offered was lower than she had previously been receiving is also without merit. It has not been established or argued that the wages offered to claimant were substantially less favorable than those prevailing for similar work in the locality. The fact that the offered wages are less than what had been previously earned does not constitute good cause for refusing employment (Matter of Consentino [Ross], 71 A.D.2d 1042; Matter of Bus [Bethelehem Steel Corp. -- Catherwood], 37 A.D.2d 98, affd 32 N.Y.2d 955). There is substantial evidence in the record to support the boards determination that claimant refused employment without good cause. Consequently, so much of the boards decision as disqualified claimant from receiving benefits effective September [78 A.D.2d 571 Page 57220]