Quik 'N Tasty Foods, Inc. v. Division of Employment Security
2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 704, 17 S.W.3d 620, 2000 WL 620312 (2000)
Rule of Law:
To qualify for unemployment benefits after voluntarily quitting employment, an employee must demonstrate "good cause attributable to her work or to her employer," meaning the work or employer itself created the conditions making it unreasonable to expect the employee to continue working.
Facts:
- Wendy Foley was employed by Quik ‘N Tasty as a machine operator for more than three years and had a history of absences due to personal problems.
- On March 24, 1999, Ms. Foley was called to a meeting in her employer’s office by her immediate supervisor and other team leaders.
- During the meeting, Ms. Foley's supervisor stated she had heard rumors that Ms. Foley was looking for another job and asked her to be honest about it.
- Ms. Foley became upset and cried, expressing that she was under stress, worried about being fired, and needed time off the following Monday, March 29, 1999, to take her children to the dentist for a root canal.
- Ms. Foley was informed by her supervisor that her absence on March 29 would be unacceptable and that she needed to find someone else to take her children to the dentist.
- The supervisor suggested that Ms. Foley consider resigning because it would "look better on her employment record than would a discharge."
- Ms. Foley was provided with a resignation form, which she completed, initially writing "personal" as the reason, and later changing it to "distance & transportation & day care duress."
- Ms. Foley admitted she was not explicitly told she would be discharged if she did not resign or if she failed to report to work on March 29.
Procedural Posture:
- Wendy Foley applied for unemployment benefits with the Division of Employment Security on March 29, 1999.
- On April 19, 1999, a deputy with the Division of Employment Security issued a determination that Ms. Foley was disqualified for benefits because she left her work voluntarily without good cause attributable to her work or employer.
- Ms. Foley appealed the deputy's determination, and a hearing was held before an Appeals Referee (Tribunal) on May 13, 1999.
- The Appeals Referee concluded that Ms. Foley left her work voluntarily without good cause attributable to the work or to the employer and disqualified her for unemployment benefits.
- Ms. Foley appealed the Tribunal’s decision to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission.
- The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission reversed the decision of the Tribunal, finding Ms. Foley’s actions reasonable, her resignation in good faith, and that she was not disqualified from benefits.
- Quik ‘N Tasty Foods, Inc. appealed the decision of the Commission to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employee voluntarily quit with "good cause attributable to her work or to her employer" for unemployment benefits purposes when she resigns in fear of imminent discharge and a prospective denial of a day off, without other employer-created conditions making continued work unreasonable?
Opinions:
Majority - Ronald R. Holliger, Judge
No, an employee does not voluntarily quit with "good cause attributable to her work or to her employer" for unemployment benefits purposes solely based on fear of imminent discharge and a prospective denial of a day off, if no other conditions created by the employer make continued employment unreasonable. The court reversed the Commission’s decision, holding that while the Commission correctly found Ms. Foley voluntarily quit, there was no factual finding that she was constructively discharged or that she acted under such duress that her resignation was involuntary. The court reiterated that "good cause" for voluntary termination must be "attributable to her work or her employer," meaning the work or employer itself must create the condition making it unreasonable to expect the employee to continue work, as defined in Hessler v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm’n. The court found that the employer's suggestion to resign to improve her employment record, or the prospective denial of a day off alone, did not meet this standard, as there were no other existing employer-created conditions that would constitute good cause. Thus, the Commission erroneously applied the law.
Concurring - Edwin H. Smith, Presiding Judge, and Victor C. Howard, Judge
Concur. (No separate reasoning was provided in the case text for the concurring opinion.)
Analysis:
This case clarifies the stringent requirement for proving "good cause attributable to her work or employer" in voluntary terminations for unemployment benefits in Missouri. It establishes that an employee's subjective fear of discharge or the employer's suggestion to resign to avoid a negative employment record, without the presence of other objectively unreasonable employer-created working conditions, is generally insufficient to warrant benefits. The decision reinforces that the cause for quitting must stem from the work or employer creating an environment where it is objectively unreasonable for an average worker to continue, rather than from the employee's personal circumstances or anticipatory actions.
