Case ID: or-app_90/html/0191-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted December 14, 1987,
    affirmed March 9, 1988
    CRAWFORD, Petitioner, v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION et al, Respondents.
    
    (87-AB-769; CA A44262)
    750 P2d 1217
    Phil Studenberg, Klamath Falls, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioner.
    Martin Dolan, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent Employment Division. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
    No appearance for respondent Weyerhaeuser Company.
    Before Warden, Presiding Judge, and Joseph, Chief Judge, and Van Hoomissen, Judge.
    PER CURIAM
    
      
       Joseph, C. J., vice Young, J., deceased.
    
   PER CURIAM

In this unemployment compensation case, claimant seeks review of an Employment Appeals Board (EAB) order that adopted the referee’s decision holding that he is disqualified from benefits. The issue is whether claimant “voluntarily left work without good cause.” ORS 657.176(2)(c). We affirm.

The relevant facts are not in dispute. Claimant worked for employer as a timber faller from 1968 until January, 1987. In early 1987, employer determined that 40 employes had to be terminated due to lack of work. A severance package was offered to those who chose to be terminated. Claimant voluntarily accepted the severance package and was terminated. An employe junior to him would have been terminated instead, if claimant had not chosen to accept the severance package and termination.

For the reasons discussed in Leonard v. Employment Division, 90 Or App 81, 750 P2d 1186 (1988), we agree with EAB that claimant “voluntarily left work without good cause,” ORS 657.176(2)(c), and is therefore disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation.

Affirmed.