Opinion
September 26, 1991
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
There is substantial evidence in the record to support the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant's late return from lunch, though only by a few minutes, constituted misconduct (see, Matter of Estrada [Levine], 49 A.D.2d 774). During the approximately 10 months that claimant worked for his employer he was absent from work numerous times. His probationary period was extended and he was warned that any future unexcused absences or latenesses would result in his employment being terminated. Continued lateness after adequate warnings has been held to constitute misconduct which bars receipt of unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Grosso [Levine], 52 A.D.2d 964; Matter of Asselin [Levine], 50 A.D.2d 999).
Mahoney, P.J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.