Opinion
May 21, 1992
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
Claimant's supervisor testified that claimant informed her that she was resigning and that she was doing so because she "didn't feel like she was going anyplace in the company" and that she "didn't think it was working out" between claimant and the supervisor. The supervisor also testified that she was satisfied with claimant's work and had even arranged for claimant to get two raises. Inability to get along with a supervisor is not good cause for leaving employment (Matter of Grossman [Levine], 51 A.D.2d 853), nor is dissatisfaction with promotional opportunities (Matter of Reich [Philip Morris, Inc. — Ross], 79 A.D.2d 841). Even if claimant's contention that she feared she was being replaced was accepted, quitting in anticipation of discharge also does not constitute good cause (see, Matter of Manson [Hartford Acc. Indem. Group — Levine], 50 A.D.2d 980) and, in any event, this raised a question of credibility for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Baker [Hartnett], 147 A.D.2d 790, appeal dismissed 74 N.Y.2d 714). Under the circumstances, the Board's conclusion that claimant left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Konjevic [Ross], 80 A.D.2d 696). Claimant's remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.
Mikoll, J.P., Yesawich Jr., Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.