Court Opinion

ID: 9534795
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:42:47.914777+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:32:36.241394
License: Public Domain

EDMONDS, J.,
dissenting.
In this case, our review is to determine whether there is substantial evidence to support EAB’s findings and whether there is a rational connection between its findings and its conclusions. Ruiz v. Employment Division, 83 Or App 609, 611, 733 P2d 5.1 (1987). The majority errs, because it substitutes its judgment for that of EAB in determining what is “good cause” under ORS 657.176(2)(c) and OAR 471-30-038(4). The rule provides:
“Good cause for voluntarily leaving work under ORS 657.176(2) (c) is such that a reasonable and prudent person of normal sensitivity, exercising ordinary common sense, would leave work. The reason must be of such gravity that the individual has no reasonable alternative but to leave work.” (Emphasis supplied.)
EAB found that claimant was not required to quit his job because, as soon as employer learned about the problem, it contacted the bank and the check was honored. There is a rational connection between EAB’s findings and its conclusions.