BRIDGET M. MANNING, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, AND ADVANTAGE HOME CARE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this unemployment compensation case, the court reversed the appeals referee's denial of benefits to an employee who quit due to a reduction in work hours from her prior assignment level. The court held that a substantial reduction in hours can constitute 'good cause attributable to the employer' for termination of employment, regardless of whether the employer had a contractual right to change the hours.
A substantial reduction in hours constitutes good cause attributable to the employer for an employee to terminate employment and qualify for unemployment benefits. The employer's contractual right to change hours does not negate an employee's eligibility for benefits when the reduction is substantial.
[1] A substantial reduction in work hours constitutes good cause for an employee to terminate employment and seek unemployment compensation benefits.
[2] A reduction in work hours or salary may constitute "good cause attributable to the employer" allowing an employee to terminate employment and remain eligible for unemploy…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Good cause attributable to the employer has been defined as those circumstances which would impel the average, able bodied, qualified worker to give up employment.”
Establishes the legal standard for determining when an employee may quit and still qualify for unemployment benefits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBridget Manning worked for Advantage Home Care and quit her job because her work assignments dropped to six hours a day. The employer had not guarante…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attributable to the Employer cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this unemployment compensation case, the appeals referee found that appellant quit her job with Advantage Home Care because her work assignments dropped to six hours a day. The referee determined that this reason for terminating employment made her ineligible for unemployment benefits, since the employer did not guarantee a specific number of hours at the time of hire. “Good cause attributable to the employer” has been defined as “those circumstances which would impel the average, able bodied, qualified worker to give up employment.” Ritenour v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 570 So. 2d 1106, 1107 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
The third district recently held in Rivero v. Miami-Dade County, 764 So. 2d 850, 852 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), that “[a] substantial reduction in hours constitutes good cause for an employee to terminate Ms position and seek unemployment compensation benefits.” Other courts have come to similar conclusions, finding that a reduction, or a change, in hours or salary may constitute “good cause attributable to the employer” allowing employee to terminate employment and remain eligible for benefits. See Miller v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 768 So. 2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (stating that a reduction in income provided the employee with good cause to terminate his employment); Aleman v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 733 So. 2d 602, 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (stating that lack of available work constituted “good cause attributable to the employer”); LeCroy v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 654 So. 2d 1054, 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (stating that a 5% decrease in pay was good cause attributable to an employer); Platt v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 618 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (finding that a change in an employee’s schedule which caused the employee to work excessive hours was sufficient cause for the employee to terminate employment and still be eligible for benefits); Knapp v. Nat’l Convenience Store, 404 So. 2d 380, 381 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (indicating that a reduction in hours from 56 to 16 hours per week warranted a finding of good cause for termination attributable to the employer).
It does not matter that the employer was entitled to change the employee’s hours under the employment agreement. The employer’s right to change the conditions of employment is relevant to whether a breach of the employment contract occurred, but is not relevant to the employee’s entitlement to unemployment compensation. See Ferguson v. Henry Lee Co., 734 So. 2d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
Consistent with these cases, we reverse and remand for the appeals referee to consider whether the reduction in Manning’s hours was substantial enough to constitute “good cause attributable to the employer.”
POLEN, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Howell & O'Neal v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Shana R. David, 934 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…“one which would reasonably impel the average able-bodied qualified worker to give up his or her employment.” Moore v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 498 So. 2d 992, 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); see also Manning v. State Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 787 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). The Commission’s standard of review of an appeals referee’s decision is whether the referee’s findings of fact are based on competent, substantial record evidence and whether the proceedings on which those findings are base…
-
Kelly v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 823 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ith representations made to the employee that she would be earning $24,000 annually by the end of her first year and that employee's resignation was for good cause attributable to the employer); see also Manning v. State Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 787 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Other courts have come to similar conclusions, finding that a reduction, or a change, in hours or salary may constitute 'good cause attributable to the employer allowing employee to terminate employment and remain eligible…
-
Diaz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 31 So. 3d 271 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…ction in hours or salary may constitute good cause attributable to the employer, which would allow an employee to voluntarily terminate his employment and still remain eligible for unemployment benefits. Manning v. State Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 787 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). In Manning, the referee found that the employee quit her job because her hours had dropped to only six hours per day. The referee determined that because the employer did not guarantee a specific number of hours at the tim…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ritenour v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 570 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Platt v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Club at Pelican Bay, Inc., 618 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Miller v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Range Sys. Eng'g Support Co., 768 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- LeCROY v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & United Tel. Co. of Fla., 654 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Ferguson v. Henry LEE Co. & Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 734 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Glenn v. State, 764 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Gary v. Knapp, 404 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Rega v. State, 733 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)