Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
FDL Foods, Inc. v. Employment Appeal Board, Department of Inspections & Appeals
Citations: 456 N.W.2d 233; 1990 Iowa App. LEXIS 38; 1990 WL 74613Docket: No. 89-1066
Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa; March 26, 1990; Iowa; State Appellate Court
The Employment Appeal Board's determination that Michael J. Aird was entitled to unemployment benefits for the period of October 10 to October 17, 1988, is upheld. Aird was suspended for one week beginning October 7, 1988, due to numerous unexcused tardies. While under suspension, he was laid off on October 10, 1988, due to a work shortage, and according to company policy, suspensions could not be served during a layoff. Had he not been suspended, he would have been recalled on October 17, 1988. The employer argued that Aird's suspension constituted a discharge under Iowa Code section 96.5(2)(a), which disqualifies individuals from receiving benefits if they were discharged for misconduct and have not earned wages equal to ten times their weekly benefit amount. The court clarified that the review was for correcting errors at law. It interpreted whether a suspension is equivalent to a termination under the statute. The law is to be construed liberally to minimize the burden of involuntary unemployment. The employer's reliance on the Havill case was deemed inapplicable, as it did not involve suspension but rather a determination of discharge for misconduct. The court found no basis to extend the statute to include suspensions and noted that Aird's layoff was not due to any fault of his own. Consequently, the court affirmed the agency's decision without addressing other issues presented in the appellant's brief.