Opinion
June 11, 1992
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
The evidence reveals that, after claimant indicated to his employer that he wished to resign, he was repeatedly asked by his supervisor to schedule a meeting to discuss his continued employment. When he failed to make this appropriate attempt to protect his employment, claimant was taken off the schedule and his employment came to an end. Although claimant testified that he was forced into resigning, this merely presented a question of credibility which was within the sole province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Baker [Hartnett], 147 A.D.2d 790, appeal dismissed 74 N.Y.2d 714; Matter of Nunes [Roberts], 98 A.D.2d 934). Under the circumstances, we find substantial evidence to support the decision of the Board that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause (see, Matter of Steed [Roberts], 115 A.D.2d 166; Matter of Sillan [French Tel. Cable Co. — Levine], 53 A.D.2d 719). We have considered claimant's remaining contentions and find that they have either been waived or lack merit.
Mikoll, J.P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.