Stephen’s Nu-Ad, Inc v Green – 10.24

Stephen’s Nu-Ad, Inc v Green
Digest no. 10.24

Section 29(1)(a) & (b)

Cite as: Stephen’s Nu-Ad, Inc v Green, 168 Mich App 219 (1988).

Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Howard Green
Employer: Stephen’s Nu-Ad, Inc.
Docket no.: B86 02424 102397W
Date of decision: April 19, 1988

View/download the full decision

COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: Claimant’s immediate termination by the employer after having given notice of intent to quit is not disqualifying under Section 29(1)(a). However, since claimant made it clear and was unwaivering that he intended to quit after his two week notice, claimant is disqualified after the date he intended to quit under Section 29(1)(a).

FACTS: On 2-3-86 claimant informed the employer that on 2-15-86 he would no longer be working for the employer. Claimant was asked to continue the employment relationship, but he declined. Later that day the employer told claimant his employment was being immediately terminated.

DECISION: Claimant is not disqualified for the period of 2-3-86 to 2-15-86 under Section 29(1)(a) but claimant is disqualified after 2-15-86 under Section 29(1)(a).

RATIONALE: Claimant’s leaving on 2-3-86 was not voluntary. “The notice of an intention to permanently leave work in two weeks is not notice of an intention to permanently leave work immediately. If an employer so chooses to treat the former identically with the latter — which, of course, is an employer’s prerogative — this does not transmute, for purposes of the Michigan Employment Security Act or otherwise, the employee’s premature separation from his or her job into a voluntary action on the part of the employee.”

However, due to claimant’s persistent and irrefragable declarations that under no circumstance would he work for the employer after 2-15-86, claimants unemployment after 2-15-86 was voluntary and disqualifying under Section 29(1)(a).

Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated: 11/90