Employee not required to take futile acts to protect job rights

A recent unemployment benefits case shows what employees must do, and what they aren’t required to do, to preserve their job rights after voluntarily leaving work because of an illness. The Arkansas Court of Appeals recently addressed the issue.

Facts

Colbert English’s initial unemployment claim was denied. He appealed to the Appeal Tribunal of the Department of Workforce Services, which conducted an evidentiary hearing in which he was the only witness and the employer didn’t participate. The appeal was also denied, as was his subsequent appeal to the Arkansas Board of Review.

The board denied English’s unemployment claim, finding he voluntarily left his last work because of illness but without making reasonable efforts to preserve his job rights. He then appealed the board’s decision to the Arkansas Court of Appeals.

The court noted it doesn’t redecide the facts on appeal but reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to upholding the board’s findings. As long as they are supported by substantial evidence (i.e., proof that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion), the court will affirm the board’s decision. Here, the court found the decision was not supported by substantial evidence and reversed in the employee's favor.

Heart attack while employed