California Code of Regulations › Title 22 - Social Security › Division 1 - Employment Development Department › Subdivision 1 - Director of Employment Development › Division 1 - Unemployment and Disability Compensation › Part 1 - Unemployment Compensation › Chapter 5 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS › Article 1 - ELIGIBILITY AND DISQUALIFICATIONS › Section 1256-10 - Voluntary Leaving - Good Cause - Domestic Circumstances Involving the Health, Care, or Welfare of Family

Current through Register 2024 Notice Reg. No. 28, July 12, 2024
(a) Scope. This section relates to whether
						  good cause exists for leaving the most recent work if the claimant leaves work
						  due to the health, care, or welfare of the claimant's family. Sections
						  1256-1,
						  1256-2,
						  1256-3, and
						  1256-9 of these regulations set
						  forth general principles also applicable under this section.
(b) Good Cause. A claimant leaves the most
						  recent work with good cause if the claimant left work due to circumstances
						  relating to the health, care, or welfare of the claimant's family of such a
						  compelling nature as to require the claimant's presence, and the claimant has
						  taken reasonable steps to preserve the employment relationship.
(c) Compelling circumstances requiring the
						  claimant's leaving of work and presence as described in subdivision (b)
						  include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) The claimant knows or reasonably believes
						  that a member of the claimant's family is seriously ill or disabled, physically
						  or mentally, or a family member is in danger of death.
(2) The claimant knows or reasonably believes
						  that a member of the claimant's family is seriously ill or disabled so as to
						  require the claimant to make a change of residence for that person's care or
						  welfare and making it impossible or impractical for the claimant to commute to
						  work (see Section
						  1256-8 of these regulations for
						  discussion of commuting problems).
(3) A member of the claimant's family has
						  died and the claimant wishes to attend the funeral or is required to make the
						  final arrangements or otherwise attend to the final affairs of the
						  decedent.
(4) A member of the
						  claimant's family is elderly and unable to care for himself or
						  herself.
(5) The claimant's minor
						  child requires care and supervision and there is no reasonable
						  alternative.
(6) There is a need to
						  preserve family unity.
EXAMPLE 1. A's spouse is an asthmatic. The spouse
							 suddenly becomes ill with a lung infection. The asthma reaches a critical
							 stage. A leaves work to care for the spouse.
A's leaving is with good cause to care for the
							 seriously ill spouse.
COMMENTS. Generally, the claimant's presence must be
							 necessary in order to care for the ill or disabled family member. The claimant
							 may need to personally provide nursing care for the ill or disabled person, or
							 the claimant's presence may be necessary in order to care for minor children
							 belonging to the ill or disabled family member. For example, the claimant's
							 mother may be critically ill, and the claimant's presence is necessary to care
							 for his or her younger brothers and sisters, and/or the normal household
							 duties, such as cooking and cleaning, require the claimant's attention.
If the illness of the family member is such as to
							 make death seem likely to occur, the claimant's presence need not be necessary
							 for purposes of providing care. Rather, good cause exists if the claimant at
							 the time of leaving his or her job knew or reasonably believed that there
							 existed a substantial likelihood that a member of his or her family was in
							 danger of death and that the claimant's presence would provide emotional
							 support and comfort. Under such circumstances, the claimant's presence is
							 necessary and the leaving of work is with good cause.
EXAMPLE 2. B's mother becomes seriously ill with
							 arthritis. A change to a warmer climate is prescribed by the doctor. B is
							 primarily responsible for the mother's care. The change to a warmer climate
							 makes commuting to work impossible or impractical for B. B leaves work.
B's leaving is for good cause to care for B's ill
							 mother who must be relocated.
COMMENTS. In assessing impracticality of commuting
							 under paragraph (2) of subdivision (c), such factors as time, distance, and
							 expense are significant (see Section
							 1256-8 of these
							 regulations).
An unreasonable delay by the claimant in changing his
							 or her residence after voluntarily leaving work may negate good cause. If an
							 obligation is so compelling as to require the claimant's presence, it is
							 reasonable that the claimant should attend to that obligation as soon as
							 possible. Thus, if the claimant delays unreasonably in changing his or her
							 residence, the inference is that the circumstances were not compelling.
Paragraph (5) of subdivision (c) is concerned with a
							 claimant's eligibility where the claimant has left work because of child care
							 problems.
If the claimant has primary responsibility for the
							 care and management of minor children and no other reasonable alternatives are
							 available for satisfying that obligation, such as securing services of a
							 baby-sitter or day nursery, changing work hours or location, or taking a
							 temporary leave of absence, the claimant's voluntary leaving of work is with
							 good cause, as his or her presence, under such circumstances, is
							 necessary.
A claimant's choice of alternatives may vary
							 depending on the particular facts. A child day-care center may, in many cases,
							 resolve the problem. If exceptional circumstances exist, such as the claimant's
							 child is seriously ill or disabled, the claimant may be acting reasonably in
							 personally caring for the child as described in this Section.
The cost of providing child care services is a factor
							 to consider if a claimant must expend an exceptional amount of money with no
							 increase in wages to compensate for the considerable extra expenses. For
							 example, where the claimant's work schedule is changed so as to require child
							 care at odd hours and additional expense, as well as other accommodations at a
							 substantial cost, such as additional commuting costs, the claimant has
							 voluntarily left work for good cause.
Under paragraph (6) of subdivision (c), a claimant
							 voluntarily leaves work with good cause if there is a need to preserve the
							 family unit. The danger of disintegration of the family unit must be
							 substantial so as to compel the claimant to voluntarily leave his or her work.
							 For example, if the claimant's spouse indicates that the spouse intends to take
							 their children and leave the locality where the claimant is working, thus
							 forcing the claimant to make a choice between the job and the family, the
							 claimant is justified in leaving work to join the spouse and family. The fact
							 that a claimant's spouse's reason for forcing the claimant to make a choice may
							 seem unreasonable is not controlling. Rather, the controlling factor is the
							 actual jeopardy to the continued existence of the claimant's family unit. On
							 the other hand, where the nature of the claimant's job is such that a minor
							 inconvenience to the claimant's family life style is created, but there is no
							 danger that the family unit will be substantially disrupted, the claimant does
							 not have good cause for leaving work. The claimant must act as a reasonable
							 person would in deciding to voluntarily leave his or her
							 work.