Parker v. Ramada Inn, 78-119
| Decision Date | 30 October 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 78-119,78-119,2 |
| Parties | Theodore PARKER, Appellant, v. RAMADA INN, and Charles Daniels, Director, State Department of Labor,Appellees |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Ralph Washington, Little Rock, for appellant.
Thelma M. Lorenzo, Little Rock, for appellees.
Appellant Theodore Parker, following his discharge as cook for the Ramada Inn, North Little Rock, applied for unemployment compensation benefits. He candidly admits that he was employed as a cook by the Ramada Inn for the 2:00 p. m. to the 10:30 p. m. shift and that after working seven consecutive days he overslept on the 8th day until 6:30 or 7:00 p. m. He did not contact his employer until the next day when he reported for work at which time he learned that the employer had employed another cook and that the employer considered him discharged. The Employment Security Division denied appellant benefits under Section 5(b)(1) (Ark.Stat.Ann. § 81-1106(b)(1) (Repl.1976)), which provides:
"For all claims filed on and after July 1, 1973, if so found by the Director an individual shall be disqualified for benefits:
(a) . . .
(b) DISCHARGED FOR MISCONDUCT. (1) If he is discharged from his last work for misconduct in connection with the work. . . . "
The denial of benefits to appellant was affirmed by the Appeals Tribunal, the Board of Review and the Circuit Court. For reversal appellant contends that the finding of the Board of Review is not supported by substantial evidence and that the employer defaulted by failing to respond to Employment Security Division inquiries and by failing to appear at the Appeals Tribunal hearing. We find no merit to either contention.
With respect to procedure, the Employment Security Act, Ark.Stat.Ann. § 81-1107(d)(4) (Repl.1976) provides:
"
Consequently, it appears that appellant's counsel in contending that appellant should win by default has failed to read the Employment Security Act in its entirety before proceeding with appellant's claim.
Likewise the Employment Security Act, Ark.Stat.Ann. § 81-1107(d)(7) (Repl.1976), provides that the findings of the Board of Review are conclusive on appeal if they are supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, appellant's contention is actually reduced to a legal argument that a single incident of missing work due to oversleeping is not misconduct within the meaning of the Employment Security Act. A single incident of missing work has ordinarily been considered misconduct within the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Paxton v. Union Nat. Bank
...by the Arkansas courts as "a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has a right to expect," Parker v. Ramada Inn, 264 Ark. 472, 572 S.W.2d 409, 411 (1978), or "an intentional or substantial disregard of an employer's interests or of an employee's duties and obligations." Will......
-
Jones v. Singer Career Systems
...under Arkansas Law, see Willis Johnson Co. v. Daniels, 269 Ark. 795, 601 S.W.2d 890, 893 (Ct.App.1980); Parker v. Ramada Inn, 264 Ark. 472, 572 S.W.2d 409, 411 (1978). See also Paxton v. Union Nat. Bank, 688 F.2d 552, 567 n. 21 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 103 S.Ct. 1772, 76 ......
-
Reynolds v. Daniels, E
...a right to expect of his employees. Stagecoach Motel v. Krause, 267 Ark. 1093, 593 S.W.2d 495 (Ark.App.1980), and Parker v. Ramada Inn, 264 Ark. 472, 572 S.W.2d 409 (1978). We find no case in Arkansas which specifically addresses the issue whether the use of profanity by an employee is misc......
-
Schadler v. Job Service North Dakota, 10786
...contributing factor in determining whether or not an employee's single unexcused absence constitutes misconduct. Parker v. Ramada Inn, 264 Ark. 472, 572 S.W.2d 409, 411 (1978) [cook's single unexcused absence from work at a restaurant constitutes misconduct]; Dulgerian v. Com. Unemployment ......