Johnson v. Mississippi Department of Employment Security

Citations: 150 So. 3d 149; 2014 Miss. App. LEXIS 626; 2014 WL 5553818Docket: No. 2013-CC-01120-COA

Court: Court of Appeals of Mississippi; November 3, 2014; Mississippi; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Zelma Johnson appeals the Circuit Court of Washington County's affirmation of the Mississippi Department of Employment Security (MDES) Board of Review's denial of her unemployment benefits. The Court finds insufficient evidence to support the Board's decision, reversing and remanding for a calculation of benefits. Johnson was employed for thirty-eight years as a family-service worker until her discharge on September 27, 2012, for alleged insubordination. The employer claims she repeatedly failed to follow direct orders regarding the relocation of a special-needs child.

The incident involved Johnson being directed to move a child from a three-year-old class to a four-year-old class. Johnson contended that the child's age was misrepresented on the transfer slip and that her class was already at maximum capacity. She attempted to find another class willing to take the child but faced refusals. Despite her efforts, an email from her supervisor, Lena Berry, accused Johnson of failing to follow orders, resulting in her suspension and eventual termination. Prior to this incident, Johnson received a verbal warning for rudeness, but her performance evaluations throughout her career were mostly positive.

An MDES claims examiner, after investigating the situation, concluded Johnson's discharge was due to insubordination, disqualifying her from unemployment benefits. The administrative law judge upheld this decision, as did the Board and the Circuit Court. Johnson's subsequent appeal to the higher court resulted in a reversal of the lower court's decision, indicating flaws in the evidence supporting the insubordination claim.

The standard of review for administrative appeals confirms that a Board’s findings of fact are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence and free from fraud, as outlined in Miss.Code Ann. 71-5-531 (Rev. 2011). An agency's conclusions can only be overturned if they are: unsupported by substantial evidence, arbitrary or capricious, beyond the agency's authority, or infringing on an employee’s statutory or constitutional rights. Substantial evidence is defined as relevant evidence that supports a reasonable conclusion, exceeding mere scintilla.

In Johnson’s case, she argues that the Board's denial of her unemployment benefits for misconduct and insubordination lacked substantial evidence. Under Miss.Code Ann. 71-5-513(A)(1)(b) (Supp. 2014), an employee is disqualified from benefits if dismissed for misconduct, characterized by willful disregard for the employer’s interests, including deliberate violations of expected behavior. Carelessness or isolated incidents of negligence do not qualify as misconduct.

Insubordination falls under misconduct and is defined as a continual refusal to obey reasonable orders from authority. The employer must present substantial, clear, and convincing evidence of the employee’s disqualifying conduct. In this particular case, the findings indicate that while Johnson's supervisor instructed her to place a child in the appropriate classroom, she did not follow through once she learned that a coworker had initially agreed to take the child but later refused. Consequently, the child was placed by another employee. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) upheld the denial of benefits based on these findings.

The claimant, Johnson, was terminated by her employer for not following management's instructions regarding the placement of a child in the appropriate age group. Although Johnson claimed to have completed the task, evidence showed that she placed the child incorrectly and that another worker initially accepted the child but later rejected the placement. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that Johnson did not fulfill her responsibility and that her actions demonstrated a disregard for the expected behavior of an employee. The circuit court upheld the denial of unemployment benefits based on this incident, despite the employer suggesting multiple reasons for Johnson's discharge.

However, the court's review indicated that the Board’s decision lacked substantial evidence, particularly since the incident on September 14, 2012, was the only basis for denying benefits. Johnson argued that her classrooms were full and that it was not insubordination to rely on her coworkers' decisions regarding the child's placement. The court found no justification for labeling Johnson's conduct as wilful misconduct or insubordination, as she attempted to place the child despite her constraints. The court concluded that the Board's decision was arbitrary and not supported by evidence, resulting in the reversal of the circuit court's ruling and a remand to the Mississippi Department of Employment Security for the calculation of Johnson's unemployment benefits. All appeal costs were assessed to the appellee. Additional memos corroborated Johnson's account, and the only prior complaint against her was a verbal warning for rudeness, which was denied by the parent involved.