March 16, 2009
AMANDA M. MYLSON, APPELLANT,
BOARD OF REVIEW AND SPECTRUM FOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT, RESPONDENTS.
On appeal from the Board of Review, Department of Labor, Docket No. 174,096.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Argued March 3, 2009
Before Judges Grall and Ashrafi.
Amanda M. Mylson appeals from a final decision of the Board of Review affirming a determination of the Appeal Tribunal that she is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits for a six-week period because she was terminated for "misconduct connected with [her] work," N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(b). We affirm.
Mylson had been employed as an activity therapist by Spectrum for Living Development (Spectrum) for seven months when she was terminated for insubordination. The Appeal Tribunal heard testimony from Mylson, the supervisor who spoke to Mylson about her work and two other employees of Spectrum who heard Mylson loudly and angrily denounce her supervisor in crude and derogatory terms when clients were present. Mylson denied the allegations and gave testimony to establish that her accusers had motive to fabricate their version of the incident.
The Appeal Tribunal found the testimony of Spectrum's witnesses "more credible" and concluded that Mylson disregarded standards of behavior her employer has a right to expect. The Board affirmed.
The Board's determination to impose a six-week disqualification from receipt of unemployment compensation benefits based on termination for misconduct is consistent with the criteria set forth in N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(b). "'Misconduct within the meaning of [N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(b)] . . . must be an act of wanton or willful disregard of the employer's interest, a deliberate violation of the employer's rules, a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or negligence in such degree or recurrence as to manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design, or show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer's interest or of the employee's duties and obligations to the employer.'" Parks v. Bd. of Review, 405 N.J. Super. 252, ___ (App. Div. 2009) (quoting Beaunit Mills, Inc. v. Bd. of Review, 43 N.J. Super. 172, 183 (App. Div. 1956), certif. denied, 23 N.J. 579 (1957)). Substantial credible evidence in the record supports the Board's conclusion that Mylson's conduct amounted to a disregard of standards of behavior her employer has a right to expect, and application of the statutory period of disqualification is neither arbitrary nor capricious. See Brady v. Bd. of Review, 152 N.J. 197, 210-11 (1997); R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D).
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.