 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Goldenson v. Firestsite Staffing5/30/2000
Relator Susan B. Goldenson challenges a decision by a representative of the respondent Commissioner of Economic Security disqualifying her from receiving reemployment insurance benefits. Because the evidence reasonably supports the commissioner's representative's conclusion that Goldenson failed to accept, without good cause, offers of suitable employment from respondent Firstsite Staffing, Inc. (Firstsite), a temporary employment agency, we affirm.
DECISION
In reemployment insurance cases, we review "the findings of the commissioner or the commissioner's representative, not those of the [reemployment insurance judge], even though those findings might involve witness credibility." Tuff v. Knitcraft Corp., 526 N.W.2d 50, 51 (Minn. 1995). The commissioner's findings are considered in the light most favorable to the decision, and those findings will not be disturbed if the evidence reasonably supports them. Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hosp., Inc., 448 N.W.2d 519, 523 (Minn. 1989).
An employee is disqualified from receiving benefits if he or she, without good cause, fails "to apply for available, suitable employment of which the claimant was advised by the commissioner or an employer" or fails "to accept suitable employment when offered." Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 8(1), (2) (1998).
Goldenson worked for one of Firstsite's clients from October 1998 to February 1999 as a sales telemarketer. Firstsite's staffing specialist, Amy Jensen, testified that when Goldenson's temporary assignment ended, she offered Goldenson a number of other assignments. Jensen submitted documentation in the form of notes she took on her contacts with Goldenson. Although Goldenson claimed that Jensen only offered her two assignments during that period, the commissioner's representative was entitled to credit Jensen's testimony and discount Goldenson's. See Mark W. Peterson Law Offices v. Murphey, 392 N.W.2d 319, 322 (Minn. App. 1986) (credibility determinations are for fact finder).
Suitable employment is defined as "reasonably related to the claimant's qualifications," considering
the degree of risk involved to the health and safety, physical fitness, prior training, experience, length of unemployment, prospects for securing local employment in the claimant's customary occupation, and the distance of the employment from the claimant's residence. Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 9 (1998).
The issue of whether an offer of employment is "suitable" is one of fact to be determined by the commissioner. Zielinski v. Ryan Co., 379 N.W.2d 157, 159 (Minn. App. 1985). An offer of temporary employment may be suitable when a claimant's work history includes temporary and short-term employment, and there is no evidence that the claimant sought permanent employment. See Vejdani v. Western Temp. Serv., Inc., 486 N.W.2d 461, 462-63 (Minn. App. 1992).
In this case, Goldenson does not claim that she refused Firstsite's offered assignments because she wanted or desired permanent employment. To the contrary, Goldenson appears to prefer temporary work; all of her prior jobs have been temporary or short term. Moreover, the assignments offered to Goldenson involved unskilled clerical and office duties; these positions were commensurate with Goldenson's prior history of clerical, sales, or office jobs. Finally, although the offered positions paid between $8 and $12 per hour, somewhat less than the $13 per hour Goldenson was earning at her last position with Firstsite, Goldenson admitted at the hearing that pay of $10 to $12 per hour was acceptable to her. Thus, the offered positions were suitable, based on pay and on Goldenson's previous training and experie
Page 1 2 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|