Minnesota – In a recent case a claimant who had been caring for a family member through a home health care staffing agency alleged that she had been discharged from her assignment when her client moved out of the country and as a result she was no longer able to work for him. On the other hand, the employer maintained that ongoing work was available and when offered to the claimant, it was refused.
Under Minnesota’s unemployment compensation laws, when service for a particular patient ends, attendants are only eligible for unemployment compensation benefits if they tell the staffing service they are willing and able to work with another patient. Otherwise, the end of the original assignment doesn’t count as a discharge.
While an Unemployment Law Judge (ULJ) ruled in favor of the claimant, the state Court of Appeals overturned that ruling stating that “In this case, respondent elected to serve one client, her uncle. She knew, from the beginning of the employment, that there was an option available to be assigned more clients…Further, when respondent communicated that her uncle had left the country, relator offered her the chance to work for a new client; respondent chose not to work. The end of the employment relationship was not the effect of a policy change or a decision that relator did not want to employ respondent. Relator gave respondent a chance to stay, and she declined…In view of the entire record as submitted, the ULJ’s decision finding that respondent was discharged and did not quit is unsupported by substantial evidence in the record. Based on these conclusions, we reverse the decision”.
Read the Full Case Details Here: http://law.justia.com/cases/minnesota/court-of-appeals/2017/a16-1316.html