By Payroll and Entitlements Editorial Staff
The claimant, a licensed cosmetologist who provided hair care to the residents at a residential care facility, was discharged because the employer decided "to go in a different direction." The employer denied that the claimant was discharged for any misconduct or for her earlier objections to providing hair care to any residents with a communicable disease. According to the court, there was no evidence to suggest that the claimant was required to do anything at work that would have put her cosmetology license at risk, nor was there any indication that the claimant was disciplined after she refused to provide hair care to a patient with a communicable disease or that her objection had anything to do with her discharge. In addition, the record did not show that, had the claimant continued to work, she would have been required to provide hair care to a resident with a communicable disease. However, the claimant failed to make any reasonable effort to resolve her asserted cause for leaving. Merely asking why she was being discharged was not a reasonable effort at resolving any concerns she might have had about putting her license at risk. As a result, the Board’s finding denying the claimant benefits for leaving work without good cause attributable to the employer was upheld and the lower court's ruling awarding benefits was reversed (Heidi J. Flynn v. DES, Ill. App. Ct. (Unpub. Op.), No. 2-18-0746, September 11, 2019).
Interested in submitting an article?
Submit your information to us today!Learn More