Court Opinion

ID: 9849576
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:42:47.153543+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:18.260721
License: Public Domain

O’Connor, J.
(dissenting): Although the task of authoring the majority opinion fell to my lot, I must respectfully join in the foregoing dissent. In addition, I believe if the legislature had intended that employees not be entitled to unemployment compensation benefits under the circumstances prevailing in the instant cases, the statutes would have so stated. The holding of the majority now makes an employee’s eligibility for benefits dependent upon the niceties of expression found in each collective bargaining agreement and disregards the conditions of eligibility specifically enumerated in the act. Actually, the court’s interpretation of the agreement in question amounts to a waiver of rights to which an employee is otherwise entitled. Such agreements are invalid under the provisions of the act. (K. S. A. 44-718.)
Kaul, J., joins in the foregoing dissents.