FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., BROWN and LAND, JJ.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules
April 30, 2025
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A25A0242. PEACE v. BRUCE THOMPSON, COMMISSIONER OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR et al.
LAND, Judge.
During the COVID-19 Public Health State of Emergency, Dana Peace’s
employer provided notice of a mandatory in-person meeting that violated the terms
of an Executive Order issued by Governor Brian Kemp in response to the public
health emergency. Peace appeared but left before the meeting began because she was
concerned for her safety, and the employer took Peace’s absence as evidence that she
quit her employment. Peace applied to the Georgia Department of Labor (the
“Department”) for unemployment insurance benefits. The Department denied her
unemployment claim, and the superior court affirmed that decision upon judicial
review. Peace appealed, and this Court vacated the superior court’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings in Peace v. Butler, 367 Ga. App. 474 (887 SE2d 70)
(2023) (“Peace I”). Upon remand, the Department’s Administrative Hearing Officer
(“AHO”) again denied benefits, and the superior court affirmed that decision. This
Court then granted Peace’s application for discretionary appeal.1 For the following
reasons, we reverse.
On appeal from a superior court ruling in an administrative action, this Court’s
“duty is not to review whether the record supports the superior court’s decision but
whether the record supports the final decision of the administrative agency.”
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Butler v. Butler, 363 Ga. App. 280, 281 (870 SE2d
857) (2022). On appeal, this Court “must uphold the agency’s findings of fact if they
are supported by ‘any evidence,’ and we evaluate de novo the conclusions of law
based upon those factual findings.” Id.
We are mindful of the General Assembly’s declaration that “economic
instability due to unemployment is a serious menace to the health, morals, and welfare
of the people of this state.” OCGA § 34-8-2. We thus “liberally construe the
provisions of the unemployment statutes in favor of the employee” and narrowly
1 The State did not file a brief in this appeal. 2 construe “statutory exceptions and exemptions that are contrary to the expressed
intention of the law[.]” Butler, 363 Ga. App. at 281.
The following is a summary of facts set forth in Peace I:
The record shows that Peace begain working as a sales representative for [Southern Historical News, Inc. (“Southern Historical”)] in 2000. In May 2020, during the COVID-19 Public Health State of Emergency,2 Peace received the following notice in the mail from her employer: “We are planning to reopen June 1st. We will have a meeting Tuesday, May 26th @ 10:00 a.m. Everyone MUST be here if you plan to keep your job.” The meeting was to be conducted in-person at the Southern Historical office.
Peace arrived for the meeting early and asked Mike Rogers, Southern Historical’s owner, whether the gathering could be held outside to comply with COVID-19 guidelines. Rogers declined the request, indicating that the meeting would proceed indoors in an area where Peace did not believe the attendees (approximately 17 people, most of whom were unmasked) could socially distance. Rogers questioned why Peace and a few others were wearing masks, stating that he was “tired of the GD rules” and making light of the pandemic. According to one witness, Rogers told individuals who were worried about the meeting
2 On April 30, 2020, Governor Brian Kemp extended the Public Health State of Emergency through June 12, 2020. See GA. Exec. Order No. 04.30.01. The executive orders issued in 2020 are available at https://gov.georgia.gov/executive-action/executive-orders/2020-executive-orders. 3 that if they were “scared of the GD virus, [they] should take a gun and put it to [their] heads.”
Concerned for her safety, Peace left the office. Jane Everly, her immediate supervisor, sent Peace a text message, stating: “We are starting the meeting so if you’re not in it we assume you quit.” Peace did not return. At the time, Peace was a “little bit obese” and she believed that she had autoimmune issues, although she had not been diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder. She also lived with her fiancé, who had high blood pressure, a heart condition, and diabetes.
Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 474-475. The AHO in Peace I, supra, found that the size of the
meeting room made it “impossible to socially distance.” In early 2021, Peace was
diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis.
In June 2020, Peace applied to the Department for unemployment benefits. A
claims examiner denied the claim after concluding that Peace had voluntarily resigned
her position. Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 475. Peace appealed that decision to the
Department’s appeals tribunal, and an AHO was appointed to review the events
surrounding her separation. Id. The AHO held an evidentiary hearing and affirmed
the denial of benefits. The AHO’s order acknowledged that Peace left the meeting due
to concerns about the lack of COVID-19 safety guidelines but concluded that she
4 “voluntarily quit her position by walking out of a mandatory meeting without
authorization . . . The claimant failed to show a good work-connected cause for
quitting.” Id. The Department’s Board of Review adopted the AHO’s findings and
affirmed the decision. Id. On motion for reconsideration, Peace argued that the Board
failed to consider her claim under an Emergency Rule adopted in March 2020 to
specifically address COVID-19. See Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r. 300-2-9-.06 (5). Id. The
Board denied the motion for reconsideration without discussion. Id. Peace then
petitioned the superior court for judicial review, and the superior court affirmed the
Board. Id.
Peace appealed the superior court’s ruling to this Court. In Peace I, this Court
vacated the superior court’s judgment and directed the superior court to make the
findings necessary to determine whether Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r. 300-2-.05 (1)
applied and to analyze Peace’s claim for benefits under the COVID-19 Emergency
Rule, Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 300-2-9.06 (5). Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 475.
Upon remand, the AHO held another hearing on September 28, 2023. The
AHO then again denied benefits in a corrected decision, addressing the issues noted
5 by this Court. The Board and the superior court affirmed the decision to deny
benefits.
1. Peace argues that the Department and the superior court erroneously
concluded that Southern Historical’s failure to adhere to COVID-19 safety protocols
did not change the terms and conditions of her employment (as that employment
existed at the time) and that Peace lacked a good work-related reason to quit under Ga.
Comp. R. & Regs, r. 300-2-9-.05 (1).
In Peace I, supra, this Court remanded the case to the Department so that it
could make the findings necessary to determine whether Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r.
300-2-9-.05 (1) (e) applies in this case. See Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 477 (1). Upon
remand, the Department modified its original order to conclude that Rule 300-2-9-.05
(1) did not apply because Peace “has not shown that the employer changed the terms
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., BROWN and LAND, JJ.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules
April 30, 2025
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A25A0242. PEACE v. BRUCE THOMPSON, COMMISSIONER OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR et al.
LAND, Judge.
During the COVID-19 Public Health State of Emergency, Dana Peace’s
employer provided notice of a mandatory in-person meeting that violated the terms
of an Executive Order issued by Governor Brian Kemp in response to the public
health emergency. Peace appeared but left before the meeting began because she was
concerned for her safety, and the employer took Peace’s absence as evidence that she
quit her employment. Peace applied to the Georgia Department of Labor (the
“Department”) for unemployment insurance benefits. The Department denied her
unemployment claim, and the superior court affirmed that decision upon judicial
review. Peace appealed, and this Court vacated the superior court’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings in Peace v. Butler, 367 Ga. App. 474 (887 SE2d 70)
(2023) (“Peace I”). Upon remand, the Department’s Administrative Hearing Officer
(“AHO”) again denied benefits, and the superior court affirmed that decision. This
Court then granted Peace’s application for discretionary appeal.1 For the following
reasons, we reverse.
On appeal from a superior court ruling in an administrative action, this Court’s
“duty is not to review whether the record supports the superior court’s decision but
whether the record supports the final decision of the administrative agency.”
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Butler v. Butler, 363 Ga. App. 280, 281 (870 SE2d
857) (2022). On appeal, this Court “must uphold the agency’s findings of fact if they
are supported by ‘any evidence,’ and we evaluate de novo the conclusions of law
based upon those factual findings.” Id.
We are mindful of the General Assembly’s declaration that “economic
instability due to unemployment is a serious menace to the health, morals, and welfare
of the people of this state.” OCGA § 34-8-2. We thus “liberally construe the
provisions of the unemployment statutes in favor of the employee” and narrowly
1 The State did not file a brief in this appeal. 2 construe “statutory exceptions and exemptions that are contrary to the expressed
intention of the law[.]” Butler, 363 Ga. App. at 281.
The following is a summary of facts set forth in Peace I:
The record shows that Peace begain working as a sales representative for [Southern Historical News, Inc. (“Southern Historical”)] in 2000. In May 2020, during the COVID-19 Public Health State of Emergency,2 Peace received the following notice in the mail from her employer: “We are planning to reopen June 1st. We will have a meeting Tuesday, May 26th @ 10:00 a.m. Everyone MUST be here if you plan to keep your job.” The meeting was to be conducted in-person at the Southern Historical office.
Peace arrived for the meeting early and asked Mike Rogers, Southern Historical’s owner, whether the gathering could be held outside to comply with COVID-19 guidelines. Rogers declined the request, indicating that the meeting would proceed indoors in an area where Peace did not believe the attendees (approximately 17 people, most of whom were unmasked) could socially distance. Rogers questioned why Peace and a few others were wearing masks, stating that he was “tired of the GD rules” and making light of the pandemic. According to one witness, Rogers told individuals who were worried about the meeting
2 On April 30, 2020, Governor Brian Kemp extended the Public Health State of Emergency through June 12, 2020. See GA. Exec. Order No. 04.30.01. The executive orders issued in 2020 are available at https://gov.georgia.gov/executive-action/executive-orders/2020-executive-orders. 3 that if they were “scared of the GD virus, [they] should take a gun and put it to [their] heads.”
Concerned for her safety, Peace left the office. Jane Everly, her immediate supervisor, sent Peace a text message, stating: “We are starting the meeting so if you’re not in it we assume you quit.” Peace did not return. At the time, Peace was a “little bit obese” and she believed that she had autoimmune issues, although she had not been diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder. She also lived with her fiancé, who had high blood pressure, a heart condition, and diabetes.
Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 474-475. The AHO in Peace I, supra, found that the size of the
meeting room made it “impossible to socially distance.” In early 2021, Peace was
diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis.
In June 2020, Peace applied to the Department for unemployment benefits. A
claims examiner denied the claim after concluding that Peace had voluntarily resigned
her position. Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 475. Peace appealed that decision to the
Department’s appeals tribunal, and an AHO was appointed to review the events
surrounding her separation. Id. The AHO held an evidentiary hearing and affirmed
the denial of benefits. The AHO’s order acknowledged that Peace left the meeting due
to concerns about the lack of COVID-19 safety guidelines but concluded that she
4 “voluntarily quit her position by walking out of a mandatory meeting without
authorization . . . The claimant failed to show a good work-connected cause for
quitting.” Id. The Department’s Board of Review adopted the AHO’s findings and
affirmed the decision. Id. On motion for reconsideration, Peace argued that the Board
failed to consider her claim under an Emergency Rule adopted in March 2020 to
specifically address COVID-19. See Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r. 300-2-9-.06 (5). Id. The
Board denied the motion for reconsideration without discussion. Id. Peace then
petitioned the superior court for judicial review, and the superior court affirmed the
Board. Id.
Peace appealed the superior court’s ruling to this Court. In Peace I, this Court
vacated the superior court’s judgment and directed the superior court to make the
findings necessary to determine whether Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r. 300-2-.05 (1)
applied and to analyze Peace’s claim for benefits under the COVID-19 Emergency
Rule, Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 300-2-9.06 (5). Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 475.
Upon remand, the AHO held another hearing on September 28, 2023. The
AHO then again denied benefits in a corrected decision, addressing the issues noted
5 by this Court. The Board and the superior court affirmed the decision to deny
benefits.
1. Peace argues that the Department and the superior court erroneously
concluded that Southern Historical’s failure to adhere to COVID-19 safety protocols
did not change the terms and conditions of her employment (as that employment
existed at the time) and that Peace lacked a good work-related reason to quit under Ga.
Comp. R. & Regs, r. 300-2-9-.05 (1).
In Peace I, supra, this Court remanded the case to the Department so that it
could make the findings necessary to determine whether Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r.
300-2-9-.05 (1) (e) applies in this case. See Peace I, 367 Ga. App. at 477 (1). Upon
remand, the Department modified its original order to conclude that Rule 300-2-9-.05
(1) did not apply because Peace “has not shown that the employer changed the terms
and conditions of work when she quit.” Peace again applied to the superior court for
judicial review. The superior court then held that it was constrained to accept the
Department’s finding that Southern Historical had not changed the terms and
conditions of Peace’s work. We disagree and therefore reverse.
6 OCGA § 34-8-194 (1) (A) provides that an individual shall be disqualified for
unemployment benefits when she voluntarily leaves her employment “without good
cause in connection with the individual’s most recent work.” The “burden of proof
of good cause in connection with the individual’s most recent work shall be on the
individual.” OCGA § 34-8-194 (1) (D). “Whether or not an employee voluntarily
leaves employment is usually a question of fact, but whether there existed a good cause
for his voluntary termination more often requires a legal conclusion.” (Citation and
punctuation omitted.) Trappier v. Butler, 348 Ga. App. 522, 524 (823 SE2d 838)
(2019).
As this Court has held, unhealthy conditions in the workplace can constitute
good cause for resigning from one’s employment under OCGA § 34-8-194 (1).
Holstein v. North Chemical Co., 194 Ga. App. 546, 548 (3) (390 SE2d 910) (1990). If the
employee voluntarily quit her job because she “was unable to perform properly [her]
employment duties without unreasonable harm to [her] health due to continued
employment” and timely notified her employer for the reason for this decision, “such
voluntary quitting would be with due cause as a matter of law.” (Emphasis in original.)
Id. at 548 (3). See also Hudson v. Butler, 337 Ga. App. 207, 210 (786 SE2d 879) (2016)
7 (Nursing home employee had good cause for voluntarily quitting her job as a certified
nursing assistance when, despite repeatedly informing director of nursing and
assistant director of her pre-existing back injury, they failed to provide her assistance
in tending to patients who required two-person assistance to maneuver).
Moreover, the Georgia Department of Labor’s Rules state that an employee
who voluntarily quits is not disqualified from receiving benefits if she can show “that
the employer has changed the terms and conditions of work in a manner that the
employee, applying the judgment of a reasonable person, would not be expected to
continue that employment.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 300-2-9-.05 (1). This Rule
provides that the
[f]actors which the Commissioner shall consider in making ths determination may include, among others, the following: . . . (e) Whether the employee’s health was placed in jeopardy by conditions on the job. There must be some clear connection between the health problem and the performance of the job, and professional medical advice is required unless the reason would be obvious that harm to the employee would result from continued employment. . . . Provided, however, the employee must discuss the matter with the employer to seek a resolution by another assignment or other changes that would be appropriate to relieve the medical problem before the employee can show good work- connected cause for quitting[.]
8 Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 300-2-9-.05 (1) (e) (emphasis supplied).
Here, we conclude that the “the terms and conditions” of Peace’s work
changed when Southern Historical chose not to follow the then existing COVID-19
safety protocols promulgated by the State of Georgia to keep its citizens safe during
the COVID-19 Public Health State of Emergency. These protocols were more than
mere suggestions by legitimately concerned health officials; they were mandated
requirements that were the subject of an Executive Order issued by Governor Kemp.
Southern Historical’s violation of these requirements gave Peace good cause to leave
the worksite.
On March 14, 2020, and in accordance with the powers given to him by OCGA
§ 38-3-51 (a) and (c), Governor Brian Kemp responded to the COVID-19 pandemic
by declaring a Public Health State of Emergency in Georgia. Ga. Exec. Order No.
03.14.20.01. This declaration conferred certain powers upon the Governor, including,
but not limited to,
enforcing laws related to emergency management, performing duties necessary to protect the population, and using available state resources to manage the emergency. During a Public Health State of Emergency, the Governor has the authority to compel a health care facility to provide services, to implement a mandatory vaccination or quarantine program,
9 and to direct the Department of Public Health to coordinate the state’s response to the threat.
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Ahlzadeh, Marissa & Chac, Fanny,
PREEMPTION: Executive Order by the Governor to Ensure a Safe & Healthy Georgia,
37 Ga. St. Univ. L. Rev. 95, n. 48 (2020).
In exercise of these statutory powers, Governor Kemp issued an Executive
Order on May 12, 2020, ordering that “no business shall . . . allow Gatherings of
persons” except as necessary for “Critical Infrastructure.”. See Ga. Exec. Order
05.12.20.02.3 The Order defined “Gatherings” as “more than ten (10) persons
physically present in a Single Location if, to be present, persons are required to stand
or be seated within six (6) feet of any other person.” Id. The Executive Order further
mandated that all businesses that do not meet the definition of Critical Infrastructure
“shall implement measures which mitigate the exposure and spread of COVID-19
among its workforce.” Id. Finally, the Executive Order “strongly encourage[d] the
use of face coverings while outside homes or residences.” Id. This Executive Order
was in effect on May 26, 2020 when Peace was instructed to return to work.
3 This Executive Order can be found at https://gov.georgia.gov/executive-action/executive-orders/2020-executive-orders. 10 There is no dispute that Southern Historical was not a “critical infrastructure”
business on May 26, 2020 and that the requirements of the Governor’s Executive
Order therefore applied to it. There is also no dispute that Southern Historical
violated this Executive Order on May 26, 2020 when it required its 17 employees to
congregate in a room that was too small to allow for six foot spacing and when it failed
to implement any measures to mitigate the exposure and spread of COVID-19 among
its workforce. When viewed in this light, it is evident that Southern Historical changed
the terms and conditions of Peace’s work when it required her to return to work on
May 26, 2020 in clear violation of the Executive Order. Before she was instructed to
return to work, Southern Historical was abiding by the Executive Order and was not
requiring that Peace congregate with other employees in violation of the Order. On
May 26, 2020, Southern Historical changed course and chose to violate the mandates
of the Order. Doing so constituted a clear change in the terms and conditions of
Peace’s work.
It is also clear to us that Southern Historical’s change of Peace’s work
conditions was communicated and effectuated “in a manner that the employee,
applying the judgment of a reasonable person, would not be expected to continue that
11 employment.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 300-2-9-.05 (1). In light of the ongoing
pandemic and our Governor’s prompt and decisive response to it, it cannot reasonably
be argued that a reasonable person in Peace’s situation should be expected to simply
ignore her employer’s violation of the Executive Order that was issued to protect
people like her. Construing Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 300-2-9-.05 (1) “in favor of [Peace]
and acknowledging Georgia’s policy favoring payment of unemployment benefits to
former employees who are unemployed through no fault of their own,” Trappier, 348
Ga. App. at 526, we find that Southern Historical’s change in the terms and
conditions of Peace’s employment gave her good cause to leave her employment and
that the Department and the superior court erred as a matter of law by finding
otherwise.
2. As a result of our ruling in Division 1, we need not address Peace’s remaining
enumerations of error.
Judgment reversed. Barnes, P. J., and Brown, J., concur.