Opinion
Record No. 2373-93-4
Decided: July 5, 1994
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY, Rosemarie Annunziata, Judge
Affirmed.
(Keith B. Davis, pro se, on brief).
(James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; Paul S. Stahl, Assistant Attorney General; Lisa J. Rowley, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee Virginia Employment Commission.
(Susan A. Sinrod; Phillips, Beckwith Hall, on brief), for appellee Kick Ash Chimney Sweep and Repair, Inc.
No brief for appellee Applied Intelligence Group, Inc.
Present: Judges Barrow, Koontz and Bray
Pursuant to Code Sec. 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.
Keith B. Davis appeals the decision of the circuit court affirming the decision of the Virginia Employment Commission (VEC). The VEC denied Davis unemployment benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Upon reviewing the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. Rule 5A:27.
Davis raises a single issue on appeal: whether "good cause" for voluntarily leaving employment may be determined by a subjective rather than an objective standard.
Under Code Sec. 60.2-625(A), "the findings of the [VEC] as to the facts, if supported by evidence and in the absence of fraud, shall be conclusive, and the jurisdiction of the court shall be confined to questions of law." See Shifflett v. Virginia Employment Comm'n, 14 Va. App. 96, 97, 414 S.E.2d 865, 865 (1992). "The VEC's findings may be rejected only if, in considering the record as a whole, a reasonable mind would necessarily come to a different conclusion." Craft v. Virginia Employment Comm'n, 8 Va. App. 607, 609, 383 S.E.2d 271, 273 (1989) (emphasis in original). Whether there was good cause "is a mixed question of law and fact reviewable by this court on appeal." Umbarger v. Virginia Employment Comm'n, 12 Va. App. 431, 432, 404 S.E.2d 380, 381 (1991).
The VEC determined that Davis was disqualified for unemployment benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. See Code Sec. 60.2-618(1). Whether an employee has left his employment for "good cause" is determined by applying "an objective standard to the reasonableness of the employment dispute and then to the reasonableness of the employee's efforts to resolve that dispute before leaving the employment." Umbarger, 12 Va. App. at 435, 404 S.E.2d at 383. An employee may not rely upon his or her own "unreasonable and purely subjective perception" to justify voluntary unemployment. Id.
The facts as determined by the VEC established that Davis left his telemarketing job with Kick Ash Chimney Sweep Repair, Inc. after the employer promoted another employee rather than Davis. Davis gave no notice before quitting his job and did not discuss his reasons for leaving.
We cannot say the record as a whole necessarily leads us to a different conclusion than that reached by the VEC. Moreover, Davis's contention that he was atypical and therefore entitled to satisfy a more subjective standard of "good cause" must fail as contrary to the law.
Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is affirmed.
Affirmed.