COOLAIRE NORDIC INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, AND LEROY GREEN, RESPONDENTS
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.
Coolaire Nordic International sought to overturn an unemployment compensation award to Leroy Green, who resigned claiming his employer removed promised transportation. The Florida District Court of Appeal granted certiorari and reversed, finding the Industrial Relations Commission's factual findings unsupported by the record.
The court reversed the Industrial Relations Commission, holding that the Commission's factual finding that the employer furnished transportation to Green and then suddenly deprived him of it was unsupported by the record. Green had arranged his own transportation since November 1974 as he was notified he would have to do, and the employer never provided him with an automobile.
[1] An employer's provision of transportation to an employee does not alter the terms of employment unless explicitly stated as a condition of employment.
[2] An employee who voluntarily resigns employment due to a lack of transportation is not entitled to unemployment benefits if the employer did not cause the lack of transpor…
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“The claimant arranged for his own transportation from November 1974 until May 1975, then in May the employer furnished to claimant and the co-worker transportation which continued until the separation date. The provision, by employer, of this transportation in May was an alteration of the contract of claimant's employment and this condition was broken by the employer when it suddenly deprived him of his means of transportation.”
The IRC's factual finding that was determined to be unsupported by the record.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeroy Green was employed by Coolaire Nordic from 1969 to August 1975. When the employer relocated its plant from Perrine to Hollywood, Florida, it pro…
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 Good Cause Attributable To Employer cases and more on FLexlaw
MOORE, Judge.
In this petition for writ of certiorari to review an order of the Florida Industrial Relations Commission, the Petitioner-employer seeks to set aside the Commission’s order granting unemployment compensation benefits to the Respondent-employee, Leroy Green.
The Respondent was employed by Petitioner from 1969 to August 1975 at which time he resigned, claiming that his resignation was with good cause attributable to his employer. In 1973, the employer was located in Perrine, Florida which was in the area of Respondent’s residence. Due to a merger, the employer decided to move its plant to Hollywood, Florida, some distance from Respondent’s residence. In doing so the employer notified all employees, including the Respondent, that it would provide transportation from Perrine to Hollywood at company expense for all employees who wished it for a period of six months. In early November 1974, more than six months later, the employer notified all employees that free transportation would be terminated on November 30, 1974 and all employees were requested to make their own transportation arrangements.
Upon termination of company transportation in November 1974, the Respondent rode to work in a private car pool and thereafter made arrangements for transportation with another employee who had the benefit of an employer-owned automobile. In August 1975, the employer took back its owned automobile whereupon the Respondent advised his supervisor that he was quitting because he had no transportation. The supervisor requested him to seek transportation and advised that his job would be kept open for two weeks while Respondent was attempting to do so. Thereupon, Respondent left his employment and subsequently filed this claim. The Respondent acknowledges receipt of the original notice which provided for company transportation for six months only, and receipt of the November 1974 notice of discontinuance of such transportation.
Upon this basis a Claims Examiner determined that Respondent was eligible for benefits without disqualification. This decision was made without the benefit of receiving evidence or testimony and thereafter an Appeals Referee, who received evidence and testimony, reversed the Examiner, holding that Respondent was not entitled to benefits because he had voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his employer. On review the Industrial Relations Commission (IRC) reversed, holding that the employer had broken a condition of the employment, to wit: depriving Respondent of transportation without providing adequate notice thereof. Thus, IRC found that Respondent left his employment with good cause attributable to his employer. The Industrial Relations Commission found:
“The claimant arranged for his own transportation from November 1974 until May 1975, then in May the employer furnished to claimant and the co-worker transportation which continued until the separation date. The provision, by employer, of this transportation in May was an alteration of the contract of claimant’s employment and this condition was broken by the employer when it suddenly deprived him of his means of transportation. ...”
There is no support in the record for these findings. To the contrary, Respon dent acknowledged that he knew he would have to find his own transportation since November 1974 and, in fact, did so. He rode in a car pool with other employees until May 1975 and then rode in a company ear with a co-worker who was the only one supposed to use it as admitted by Respondent. For two or three days a week he also drove his cousin’s car. The employer never furnished an automobile to Respondent. Accordingly, the decision of the Industrial Relations Commission must be reversed.
We have not been asked, nor do we offer, to render an opinion as to whether or not an employee, under the facts here presented, would be entitled to benefits because his employer moved its operations to a distant location.
Certiorari is granted and the order of the Florida Industrial Relations Commission is quashed, and this cause remanded with instructions to enter an order consistent with this opinion.
Certiorari granted, with directions.
ALDERMAN, C. J., and DOWNEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perez v. State, 377 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…v. Industrial Relations Commission, 277 So. 2d 827, 829 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), and thus did not con [*DCCCLXXXVIII] stitute “good cause” for him voluntarily to have quit. See also Coolaire Nordic International Corp. v. Florida Department of Commerce, 356 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Uniweld Products, Inc. v. Industrial Relations Commission, supra; Zielenski v. Board of Review, 85 N.J.Super. 46, 203 A. 2d 635 (1964); 81 C.J.S. Social Security § 226 (1977). Perez claims also that, even if there were no good…
-
Fla. Sheriffs Youth Fund v. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 436 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…employment condition if he so chose, was immaterial; the issue was whether his failure to meet his job requirements was due to good cause attributable to his employer. See also Coolaire Nordick International Gorp. v. Florida Department of Commerce, 356 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Section 443.101(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), provides that an individual shall be disqualified for benefits when “he has voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his employer or has been discharged…
-
Neller v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Cowles, Inc., 510 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…y, 405 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So. 2d 468 (Fla.1982), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 981, 102 S.Ct. 2251, 72 L.Ed.2d 857 (1982); Coolaire Nordic International Corp. v. Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Employment Security, 356 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH, J., and BEVERLY, V.Q., Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence