McDevitt v. Employment Division
This text of 555 P.2d 937 (McDevitt v. Employment Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petitioner appeals from a decision of the State Employment Appeals Board denying his claim for unemployment compensation benefits.1 Adopting the decision of its Referee as "correct, proper, and complete,” the Board specifically held petitioner to be disqualified under the terms of ORS 657.176(2)(c) which excludes from eligibility those persons who have "voluntarily left work without good cause.”
Appearing before the Referee petitioner testified that between September of 1971 and August of 1975 he had been employed as an instructor at the University of Portland on a full-time basis, and as a part-time instructor by Portland Community College (PCC). During that period his sustained association with PCC had been based upon a series of contracts, each of which covered a single term or "quarter” of the academic year. Under the terms of those contracts petitioner’s employment relationship with PCC extended only through the duration of each separate term, to be renewed at the election of both parties by the offer and acceptance of another contract covering the subsequent term.2
[256]*256In August of 1975 petitioner’s full-time employment with the University of Portland came to an end;3 his contract with PCC covering the summer term also expired that same month. Petitioner thereafter filed his claim for unemployment compensation and was informed that he would be required to actively seek, and to be available for, full-time employment as a condition to the receipt of aid.4 Petitioner had previously been offered a contract to teach a single class, consisting of ninety-minute sessions on Tuesday and Thursday mornings, at PCC during the Fall term to begin on September 30, 1975. Having communicated with the Employment Division prior to responding to that offer, petitioner informed PCC that pursuant to instructions, he would be seeking full-time employment, and that if the opportunity to work full-time presented itself he would in all probability be unable to fulfill his duties under the proposed contract. In light of that response the contract offer was then withdrawn by PCC.
While this evidence would appear to be relevant to the question of whether petitioner "failed to accept suitable work when offered to him,”5 it provides no support whatsoever for the conclusion that he "voluntarily left work without good cause.” The evidence that petitioner ceased to be an "employee” of PCC on August 11, 1975 when his contract for the summer term expired is uncontroverted. The offer petitioner declined to accept was for a part-time position to begin on September 30, 1975 and was, in effect, an offer of new employment.
[257]*257The order of the Board is not, therefore, supported by substantial evidence in the whole record. ORS 183.482(8)(d).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
555 P.2d 937, 27 Or. App. 253, 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 1395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdevitt-v-employment-division-orctapp-1976.