Court Opinion

ID: 9535901
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 06:46:19.393999+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:22.847658
License: Public Domain

T. C. Quinn, J.
(dissenting). I cannot accept the reasoning of the majority. On this record, plaintiff quit his work in Ohio voluntarily and was properly disqualified from unemployment compensation benefits. When he was laid off in Michigan in the spring of 1976, he had a choice of two reasonable alternatives — accept unemployment compensation benefits or seek work elsewhere. I commend his choice to seek work elsewhere, but it was a voluntary act. When this choice proved to be more than the plaintiff bargained for, does it thereby become unreasonable? I say no.
As for a "trial period”, if the statute provided for one, I would agree with the majority decision. The statute does not so provide, and it is not the business of the courts or the MESC to create a "trial period” in order to reach a desired result.
I vote to affirm.