McCauley (Service Systems Corporation)
Digest no. 7.21
Cite as: McCauley (Service Systems Corporation), 1978 BR 55189 (B77 3812).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Mary McCauley
Employer: Service Systems Corporation
Docket no.: B77 3812 55189
Date of decision: August 21, 1978
BOARD OF REVIEW HOLDING: A claimant who is placed on a fixed-term layoff of short duration is not required to remain in the employer’s locale.
FACTS: “The claimant was placed on a fixed-term layoff due to the Christmas holiday period on December 22, 1976 and personally instructed to return on January 3, 1977. During the layoff period, the claimant visited her ill mother in Louisiana.” She reported at a branch office in Louisiana, and returned to work on schedule.
DECISION: The claimant meets the availability requirements of Section 28(1)(c) of the Act.
RATIONALE: This is a 3-2 decision. The majority states: “The purpose of the eligibility requirements of Section 28 of the Act is to insure that the recipient of unemployment benefits is genuinely attached to the labor market. See Dwyer v Michigan Employment Security Commission, 321 Mich 178 (1948). In determining labor market attachment, the law does not require the performance of a useless act. Here, nothing in the record suggests that any work would be (or was) offered by the employer to the claimant at any other site during her fixed-term layoff. As a result, it would have served no purpose for her to have remained in the locality of her employer during this period.”
“As a result of unavailable suitable work in the claimant’s locality during the period in issue, a waiver by the Commission of seeking work was in effect.”
Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Update: 11/90