Opinion
September 4, 1997
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
Claimant was employed as a machine operator at a bakery. She was discharged due to her excessive absences from work which continued even after she received a final warning that additional absences would result in the termination of her employment. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she lost her employment due to misconduct. We affirm. Excessive absences following written warnings have been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct ( see, Matter of Scott [Hudacs], 205 A.D.2d 811; Matter of Gonzales [Phipps Houses Servs. — Hudacs], 202 A.D.2d 812). Claimant's assertion that she notified the employer regarding her final absences and that they were occasioned by a medical disability raised credibility issues that were within the province of the Board to resolve ( see, Matter of Franco [Hudacs], 207 A.D.2d 577). Substantial evidence supports the Board's decision which is, accordingly, affirmed.
Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Casey, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.