On December 20, 2012, The Michigan Court of Appeals issued an unemployment decision.  For those inovlved with unemployment during 2012, it has been a wild ride.  The MCAC has made some unique decisions.  The Case of Shepard v. Meiher Great Lakes Ltd., is illustrative of those decisions.   

Ms. Shepard had sought a leave of absence.  She thought it was granted.  It wasn’t.  She was fired.  She sought unemployment.  She was denied based on misconduct.  After a hearing, the ALJ found she was not eligible based on misconduct, since she did not receive authorization for her leave and took it.  To summarize, everyone has found that Ms. Shepard was ineligible because she committed misconduct when she failed to come to work.  The MCAC concluded that misconduct did not apply, but she was ineligible because she voluntarily left work.  Then a Circuit Court affirmed that she had in fact voluntarily left work.  The Court of Appeals reversed.

The Court of Appeals found that a voluntary departure is an intentional act.  Furthermore, there is no such doctrine in Michigan Unemployment Jurisprudence such as a constructive voluntary leaving.  The Court held that Mejier’s terminated her employment, thus it can not be a voluntary quit.   

There is a provision in the statute that provides an individual who is absent from work for a period of 3 consecutive days or more without contacting the employer (in the proper method) is considered to have voluntarily quit, without good cause attributable to her employer.  

The Court of Appeals analysis is correct.  It also provides elucidation to the recent run by the Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission decisions.  Recently, the MCAC has (anecdotally) issued more opinions then previously that are very similar to these facts.  An ALJ will make findings in line with the UIA decisions and the parties arguments, only to have the MCAC go off in a different direction, especially in finding voluntary quits.  Hopefully, this decision will restore balance to the unemployment universe.