In re Dickey
This text of 89 A.D.3d 1299 (In re Dickey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Claimant worked for the employer as a meeting planner for only three days. She resigned from her position because the employer insisted that she use her legal name in the performance of her duties, rather than a professional name that she preferred. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant appeals.
[1300]*1300We affirm. General dissatisfaction with working conditions has been held to not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (see Matter of Brookes [Commissioner of Labor], 85 AD3d 1479, 1480 [2011]; Matter of Klarfeld [Commissioner of Labor], 57 AD3d 1031, 1032 [2008]). Claimant here stated that she resigned because she found that the employer’s requirement that she use her legal name was unacceptable. Notably, the employer imposed this requirement to avoid auditing problems, which claimant freely acknowledged. Under these circumstances, we find that claimant left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons.
Spain, J.P., Rose, Lahtinen, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
89 A.D.3d 1299, 932 N.Y.2d 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dickey-nyappdiv-2011.