Opinion
92946
Decided and Entered: June 26, 2003.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 4, 2002, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
Frances Ebisike, New York City, appellant pro se.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York City (Linda D. Joseph of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and, Mugglin, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Claimant was employed as an office worker in a community center. Following her return to work from sick leave, claimant's weekly work hours were reduced from 35 to 26¼. Claimant was 50 minutes late on her next day of work, apparently due to confusion over the revised schedule. After her supervisor upbraided her for tardiness, claimant resigned. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied claimant's application for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that she had left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons.
In general, dissatisfaction caused by a reduction in work hours may not constitute good cause for leaving employment (see Matter of Blankenship [Commissioner of Labor], 282 A.D.2d 861, 862; Matter of Cudnick [Sweeney], 235 A.D.2d 888), nor may hostility toward a supervisor who is perceived as unfairly critical (see Matter of Alascia [Kuhr — Commissioner of Labor], 281 A.D.2d 739; Matter of Loria [Commissioner of Labor], 254 A.D.2d 676, 677). Here, substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant voluntarily left her employment due to friction with her supervisor and dissatisfaction with the reduction in her work hours. As her reasons for leaving were characterized as noncompelling, claimant was properly disqualified from receiving benefits. The assertion that claimant was fired is contrary to the testimony given by the employer's witnesses and presented an issue of credibility for resolution by the Board (see Matter of Valentino [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 642, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 811). The remaining issues raised herein have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.