Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bayon v. Board of Review

July 17, 2007

MARIA BAYON, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND MORRISTOWN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, RESPONDENTS.



On appeal from Department of Labor, Division of Workers' Compensation, Claim Docket No. 101,747.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted June 20, 2007

Before Judges Wefing and Weissbard.

Maria Bayon appeals pro se from a final agency determination of the Board of Review (Board) affirming a decision of the Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal) dismissing as untimely her appeal from a Deputy's decision denying her application for Additional Benefits During Training (ABT). We affirm.

Bayon filed a claim for unemployment compensation benefits on or about July 24, 2005. A determination of the Deputy Claims Examiner was mailed on August 22, 2005, holding Bayon eligible for benefits, without disqualification, from July 24, 2005. On September 1, 2005, Bayon's former employer, Morristown Memorial Hospital (the Hospital), filed an appeal of the determination of the Deputy, which was docketed as #86,408. A hearing in that matter was held before the Tribunal on September 28, 2005.

On September 29, 2005, a decision was mailed by the Tribunal holding that Bayon was disqualified for benefits as of July 17, 2005, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a), finding that Bayon's voluntary leaving was without good cause attributable to the work. On October 7, 2005, Bayon filed an appeal of the decision of the Tribunal with the Board. On December 2, 2005, the Board affirmed the decision of the Tribunal in docket #86,408, finding that Bayon was given a full and impartial hearing and a complete opportunity to offer any and all evidence. Bayon never appealed the decision of the Board.

Meanwhile, Bayon filed an application for ABT. A determination of the Deputy was mailed on December 14, 2005, holding Bayon ineligible for ABT under the Workforce Development Partnership Program because she was not permanently separated from employment due to a substantial reduction in work opportunities in her job classification at her former worksite.

On February 1, 2006, Bayon filed an appeal of the Deputy's December 14, 2005 determination, which was docketed as #101,747. A hearing in that matter was held before the Tribunal on February 17, 2006, in which Bayon and a Spanish interpreter participated via telephone.

On February 17, 2006, a decision was mailed by the Tribunal dismissing Bayon's appeal as untimely under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), finding that the determination of the Deputy was mailed on December 14, 2005, Bayon received the determination of the Deputy by December 28, 2005, yet Bayon did not file her appeal until February 1, 2006, because she claimed to have been mourning her father's death on December 12, 2005.

On February 25, 2006, Bayon filed an appeal of the decision of the Tribunal with the Board. On April 6, 2006, the Board affirmed, finding that Bayon's appeal was properly dismissed in accordance with the provisions of N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1).

Bayon now appeals, contending that, (1) her dismissal was involuntary and, (2) that she established good cause for the late filing of her appeal to the Tribunal.

In its decision of September 29, 2005, on Bayon's initial claim for benefits, the Tribunal set forth the following findings of fact, which are well-supported by the record:

The claimant was employed as a dietetic assistant for the above-named employer from 11/12/01 through 7/7/05, when the claimant left the job because she could no longer do her regular job due to complaints by nurse manager and patients and she did not want to accept another job offered by her employer. The employer had spoken a number of times with the claimant about her difficulty communicating verbally because of her accent. The employer paid for classes in English as a second language . . . and training to qualify her as a dietetic assistant. The employer had no other ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.