Opinion
March 2, 2000
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 27, 1998, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Harvey L. Jacque, Rochester, appellant in person.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Bessie Bazile of counsel), New York City, for respondent.
Before: CREW III, J.P., PETERS, SPAIN, CARPINELLO and GRAFFEO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Upon review of the record, we conclude that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's ruling denying claimant's application for unemployment insurance benefits under disqualifying circumstances. It is well settled that an employee's unauthorized absence from work can be found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see,Matter of Burns [Commissioner of Labor], 259 A.D.2d 797; Matter of Greene [Commissioner of Labor], 252 A.D.2d 622). The record reveals that claimant failed to adhere to the employer's policy by taking days off without authorization and misrepresenting the reason for his absences, and claimant's exculpatory explanations merely presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see,Matter of Jones [Interboro Mut. Indem. Ins. Co. — Commissioner of Labor], 249 A.D.2d 864).
Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.