ELIZABETH C. ENGEL, APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIS WOHL & SONS, INC., AND UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 2003-03-07
No. 2D02-1163
SILBERMAN and KELLY, JJ., concur.
841 So. 2d 553 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2003) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Elizabeth Engel appeals the Unemployment Appeals Commission's reversal of an administrative determination that she was eligible for unemployment benefits after voluntarily quitting her job. The court reversed, holding that substantial evidence supported the finding that Engel quit with good cause attributable to her employer due to gender-based pay discrimination.


Holding

The court held that gender discrimination confers good cause on an employee to terminate employment, and that substantial competent evidence supported the referee's finding that Engel quit with good cause attributable to the employer. The UAC improperly reversed the referee's factual determinations because Engel provided evidence of comparable sales experience to the male employees paid more, and the employer failed to justify the pay disparity with specific evidence of differential industry experience.


Headnotes

[1] Gender discrimination constitutes good cause for an employee to terminate employment.

[2] The Unemployment Appeals Commission cannot reverse a referee's factual findings unless they are not based on substantial, competent evidence.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“gender discrimination does confer good cause on the employee to terminate her employment”

Establishes that pay discrimination based on gender provides legal justification for voluntary resignation in unemployment benefits cases

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Engel was employed as a sales trainee for nine days in July 2001 at Louis Wohl & Sons, Inc., a commercial restaurant equipment and supplies company. S…

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.


Opinion of the Court
WHATLEY, Judge.

WHATLEY, Judge.

Elizabeth C. Engel appeals an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission (UAC), which reversed the appeals referee’s determination that she was qualified to receive unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse.

The appeals referee concluded that En-gel was entitled to unemployment benefits because she voluntarily quit with good cause attributable to the employer, Louis Wohl & Sons, Inc., pursuant to section 443.101(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2001). The referee found that Engel was employed as a sales trainee from July 3, 2001, through July 11, 2001, and that she had over twenty-five years of sales experience. The referee further found that Engel had similar or more experience than her male coworkers. When Engel discovered that she was making approximately $100 less per week than her male coworkers during the training period, she confronted the sales manager.' The sales manager responded that it was a managerial decision. Thereafter, Engel resigned. The referee noted that Wohl’s witness refused to discuss the difference in the salaries between the males and the females.

In reversing the decision of the appeals referee, the UAC rejected the referee’s finding that Wohl was a food service sales company. The UAC concluded that such finding was not supported by competent, substantial evidence, as both witnesses testified that Wohl sold commercial restaurant equipment and supplies. The UAC also rejected the referee’s finding that En-gel quit with good cause attributable to Wohl, because it found that Engel did not provide any evidence that she had as much or the same type of sales experience as the male workers who were paid higher salaries during the training period.

We would first note that gender discrimination does confer good cause on the employee to terminate her employment. Fowler v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 670 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). In Carey McAnally and Co. v. Woodring, 629 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), this court held that the determination of whether an employee left her employment voluntarily without good cause attributable to her employer is a question of fact, and the UAC cannot reverse the referee’s decision unless it was not based on substantial, competent evidence. Credibility falls solely within the purview of the hearing officer’s discretion as finder of fact. Glover v. Sanford Child Care, Inc., 429 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

We agree with the UAC’s conclusion that Wohl was in the business of selling commercial restaurant equipment and supplies and was not a food service sales company. However, we disagree with its conclusion that Engel did not provide any evidence that she had as much or the same type of sales experience as the male workers who were paid higher salaries. Engel testified that she had twenty-five years of sales experience and that she had comparable experience to the male employees. When she discovered that several men were making more money than she was during the training period, she asked a sales manager about the salary discrepancy and noted her years of sales experience. The manager replied that it was a “committee decision.” He did not tell Engel that the salary discrepancy was based on sales experience in the specific field of commercial restaurant equipment and supplies.

Steven Paver, the vice president and general manager of Wohl, admitted that Engel was paid less than some of the male employees. Although he testified that the salaries were based on experience selling commercial restaurant equipment and supplies, Paver refused to give any specific examples or describe the type of experience any of the higher paid male employees had in the industry. Because there was substantial, competent evidence to support the referee’s decision, we reverse the order of the UAC and remand with instructions to reinstate the appeals referee’s decision that Engel is eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.

Reversed and remanded.

SILBERMAN and KELLY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …s referee accepted the testimony of the president of the corporation instead of the testimony of Mr. Nelson. We have no authority to override that decision because it is based on competent, substantial evidence. See Engel v. Louis Wohl & Sons, Inc., 841 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Unlike Wood v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, No. 2D05-2941, 927 So. 2d 127, 2006 WL 1098277 (Fla. 2d DCA Apr. 19, 2006) (citing Lewis v. Lakeland Health Care Center, Inc., 685 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)), this is a case in…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw