Cases September 8th–21st

Juarez-Galvan v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (10th Cir.,September 17, 2014) (upholding dismissal of employment discrimination and work environment claims because they should have been included in Juarez-Galvan I(Juarez-Galvan v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (10th Cir., July 22, 2014),below)) Olson v. Department of Workforce Service (Utah Ct. App., September 11, 2014) (upholding denial of benefits in […]

Read More

Utah Supreme Court Rejects Department of Workforce Service’s Interpretation of Statute

In a case decided on June 20, 2014, Dorsey v. DWS, 2014 UT 22, the Utah Supreme Court held that the Department of Workforce Services (DWS) had “erroneously interpreted” a statutory provision to ban seasonal employees who receive work-search deferrals from leaving the country.  As in many cases as discussed in an earlier post, the unemployment […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals: Court “Takes Issue” with Workforce Appeals Board’s Use of Unintroduced Computer Records to Overturn ALJ Decision

In Swenson v. Department of Workforce Services, the Utah Court of Appeals “[took] issue with the [Workforce Appeals] Board’s reliance on evidence that was not presented to the ALJ or given to the parties” to reverse an ALJ’s decision in an appeal of an unemployment benefits determination.  Although the Court ultimately affirmed the Workforce Appeals […]

Read More

Unemployment Fraud for Filing While out of the United States?

The Utah Department of Workforce Services has apparently begun a campaign of alleging that unemployment applicants are committing fraud when applying for benefits while out of the United States.  Relying on Utah Administrative Code Rule R994-403-112c(2)(i), the Department of Workforce Services has claimed that any travel outside of the United States makes a person ineligible […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals: Tattoo Parlor Not a Religious Entity Exempt from Unemployment Statutes

In Lowery v. Workforce Appeals Board, a tattoo parlor, Happy Valley Tattoo, claiming to be a religious entity affiliated with UBU Ministries that “considered tattooing to be one of its core religious tenets,” asserted that it was exempt from Utah’s unemployment insurance statutes.  Acknowledging that such an exemption exists, the Utah Court of Appeals held […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals – Employee Who Failed to Follow Work Schedule Not Discharged for Just Cause

On July 29, 2011, the Utah Court of Appeals upheld a Workforce Appeals Board determination that an employee who failed to follow his work schedule was not terminated for just cause and was, therefore eligible for unemployment.  In Prosper Team, Inc. v. Department of Workforce Services, the Utah Court of Appeals stated that, although it […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals: An Employee Who Requested to Rescind Resignation Still Considered to Have Quit Without Good Cause

In Issa v. DWS, the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Workforce Appeals Board which denied unemployment benefits to an employee who attempted to rescind his resignation.  The employee had resigned his employment after he was told he would be suspended for three days while the company investigated a second customer complaint.  […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals: If You’re on Vacation, You Can’t Get Unemployment

In Higgs v. DWS, the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the Department of Workforce Services determination that a man who was on vacation in the U.S. Virgin Islands had fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits for the week of his vacation.  The court rejected the man’s claims that his ignorance of the requirements of the statute should preclude […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals: Employee Who Said He Did Not Want to Remain Employed Because of his Supervisor Quit and was not Layed Off

In Brucks v. DWS, the Utah Court of Appeals agreed with the Department of Workforce Services that an employee, who apparently was attempting to gain some concessions by approaching his field supervisor and saying he did not want to remain employed if he had to work with his immediate supervisor, had quit and was not […]

Read More