Opinion
94170.
Decided and Entered February 26, 2004.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 27, 2002, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Ruth Kiteta, New York City, appellant pro se.
Before Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was discharged from her employment as a laboratory technician in the employer's blood bank due to misconduct. On December 25, 2000, claimant reported to work late and a coworker reported that claimant appeared to be under the influence of something. Security guards were sent to the lab to assess the situation and reported that claimant was slurring her words, staggering and smelled of alcohol. Claimant refused her supervisor's request to undergo an emergency room evaluation and eventually left the premises. It is well settled that absent a showing that an employee is suffering from alcoholism, reporting to work under the influence of alcohol may constitute disqualifying misconduct ( see Matter of Inscho [Commissioner of Labor], 301 A.D.2d 1006; Matter of Daly [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 614, 615). Claimant's denial that she was intoxicated raised a credibility issue for the Board to resolve ( see Matter of Chilelli [M R Tomato Distrib. — Commissioner of Labor], 306 A.D.2d 668, 669; Matter of Daly [Sweeney], supra at 615).
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.