Why Did North Carolina Deny My Benefits When I Quit to Follow My Spouse to Take Care of His Mother?

by K.D

(Nevada USA)

North Carolina denied me benefits stating I left my job for personal reasons when in fact I explained to my employer and unemployment that I had to relocate to Nevada with my spouse to take care of my sick mother in law who’s husband passed away in November of 2014. On their site it says that’s a good cause to leave my job but claimed it personal reasons. I don’t get that at all!!!!!

Chris’s Response

What you did is good personal cause to quit a job, but it does not fit with North Carolina’s current unemployment law that still requires the quit to be attributable to the work, or the employer.

The statute

§ 96-14.5. Disqualification for good cause not attributable to the employer.
(a)Determination. – The Division must determine the reason for an individual’s separation from work. An individual does not have a right to benefits and is disqualified from receiving benefits if the Division determines that the individual left work for a reason other than good cause attributable to the employer. When an individual leaves work, the burden of showing good cause attributable to the employer rests on the individual and the burden may not be shifted to the employer.

And from the NC precedent manual on Quitting Due to Health, or Illness Reasons

The Commission has long recognized that illnesses of such character and nature as to disable an employee from continuing in the employment could be such a cause as to make it necessary for the employee to discontinue his work as long as this condition existed; i.e., compelling health reasons. Because such illnesses deprive the employee of freedom from external compulsion or necessary in deciding whether to continue in employment, the Commission has consistently held that a leaving of employment for compelling health reasons is an involuntary leaving and not a voluntary one covered under G.S. 96-14(1).

But it goes on to also say …

In order to sustain a determination that a leaving of employment was involuntary due to
compelling health reasons, a claimant must (1) introduce competent testimony that at the time of leaving adequate health reasons existed to justify the leaving, (2) inform the employer of the health problem, (3)specifically request the employer to transfer him to a more suitable position, and (4) take the necessary
minimal steps to preserve his employment such as requesting a leave of absence if appropriate and
available. See Deiss v Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 475 Pa. 547, 381 A.2d.132
(1977), Carroll v Board of Review, 9 Unemployment Insurance Reporter (CCH), 11,089 (1982).
The medical evidence introduced must support the claimant’s contention that at the time of
leaving his health precluded him from performing his assigned duties. See Coyle v Unemployment
Compensation Board of Review, 56 Pa.Cmwlth. 170, 424 A.2d 588 (1981); Counts v Commissioner, 10
Unemployment Insurance Reporter (CCH) 8288 (1982).

It’s the same point I keep trying to make even for states whose law doesn’t require fault to be attributable to an employer

Personal good cause reasons to quit a job will still quite frequently, require good cause attributable to the work, or an employer.

So don’t miss the fact that good cause to quit a job is made possible .. and even easier when you can prove those efforts I’ve been harping about for years now that show you attempted to preserve your job BEFORE you were compelled to even begin thinking about quitting your job!!!!

And all because states in general .. have very few non-charging provisions.

When a NC Employer Doesn’t Have to Pay for Benefits

§ 96-11.3. Noncharging of benefits.
(a)To Specific Employer. – Benefits paid to an individual under a claim filed for a period occurring after the date of the individual’s separation from employment may not be charged to the account of the employer by whom the individual was employed at the time of the separation if the separation is due to one of the reasons listed below and the employer promptly notifies the Division, in accordance with rules adopted by the Division, of the reason:
(1)The individual left work without good cause attributable to the employer.
(2)The employer discharged the individual for misconduct in connection with the work.
(3)The employer discharged the individual solely for a bona fide inability to do the work for which the individual was hired and the individual’s period of employment was 100 days or less.
(4)The separation is a disqualifying separation under G.S. 96-14.7.
(b)To Any Base Period Employer. – Benefits paid to an individual may not be charged to the account of an employer of the individual if the benefits paid meet any of the following descriptions:
(1)They were paid to an individual who is attending a vocational school or training program approved by the Division.
(2)They were paid to an individual for unemployment due directly to a major natural disaster declared by the President pursuant to the Disaster Relief Act of 1970, and the individual receiving the benefits would have been eligible for disaster unemployment assistance under this federal act if the individual had not received benefits under this Chapter.
(3)They were paid to an individual who left work for good cause under G.S. 96-14.8.
(4)They were paid as a result of a decision by the Division and the decision is ultimately reversed upon final adjudication.
(c)Current Employer. – At the request of the employer, no benefit charges may be made to the account of an employer that has furnished work to an individual who, because of the loss of employment with one or more other employers, is eligible for partial benefits while still being furnished work by the employer on substantially the same basis and substantially the same wages as had been made available to the individual during the individual’s base period. This prohibition applies regardless of whether the employments were simultaneous or successive. A request made under this subsection must be filed in accordance with rules adopted by the Division. (2013-2, s. 4; 2013-224, s. 19.)

Chris