Opinion ID: 1127412
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: Appellant, General Chemical Corporation (General Chemical), presents the following issue for review: A. Did the Unemployment Insurance Commission act arbitrarily, capriciously, or otherwise unlawfully within the meaning of W.S. § 16-3-114(c) in reversing its Examiner's decision, and ruling that the striking claimants engaged in a strike are not disqualified from receiving benefits under W.S. § 27-3-313(a)(i)? Appellee, the Department of Employment, Unemployment Insurance Commission (Commission), states the issue as: Whether the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Commission that Patrick Senstock and the other claimants should not be disqualified from unemployment benefits because their unemployment was not due to a work stoppage resulting from a labor dispute is arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or characterized by an abuse of discretion? Claimants, Patrick Senstock, et. al. (striking workers), state the issue as: 1. Did the Unemployment Insurance Commission act arbitrary, capricious, abuse its discretion, or otherwise fail to act in accordance with law in awarding striking employees benefits in light of the Wyoming Employment Security Laws labor dispute disqualification provision contained in W.S. § 27-3-313(a)(i)?