ÿWPCø *# \UNg %µ 0˜»U<Sw@4Ïãò 0JúUDD 0Tˆ 0ÜÜ 0D¸ 0^ü 0hZ 0r 0|4 0†° 06 1uÆ 0d; U>Ÿ ­Ý v~ŠvÓ BÛ˜HP LaserJet 4/4MHPPCL5E,,,,0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(püƒ$¡¡Ò°ÒÒ„°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑ-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman )*E+,E-.D/U0U12îˆD!&ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ3|x22 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô8§ÖhZŠ,Century-WP Regular2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô(Œ(3Od$¤¤Ý ƒüƒ!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman £Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€Ô€ÔBefore€joining€Kerr€as€a€permanent€employee,€Trull€was€assigned€toÏKerr€as€a€temporary€employee€through€Manpower€Temporary€Services.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò dÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÝ  ÝÑ7€^­XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌà àà à€€€________________________________________________ÌÌò òLORETTA€TRULL,€ó óÌÌà àPetitioner„Appellant,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCrockett€Chancery€No.€6967ÌVs.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.A.€No.€02A01„9603„CH„00041ÌÌò òMARGARET€CULPEPPER,€ÌCommissioner€of€TennesseeÌDepartment€of€EmploymentÌSecurity€and€KERR€PLASTICÌPRODUCTS;€MANPOWERÌTEMPORARY€SERVICES,€ó óÌÌà àDefendants„Appellees.Ì___________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@ àFROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€CROCKETT€COUNTYÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€GEORGE€R.€ELLIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌà@ àBeth€S.€Bates€of€JacksonÌà@ àFor€AppellantÌÌà@ àCharles€W.€Burson,€Attorney€General€and€ReporterÌà@ àRobeter€W.€Stack€of€NashvilleÌà@ àJennifer€H.€Small,€Deputy€Attorney€GeneralÌà@ àFor€Appellee,€CulpepperÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòAFFIRMEDó óóóÌà@ àOpinion€filed:€€ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEÌHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEó óÌÓÓ›Ñ ° Ñà àThis€is€an€unemployment€compensation€case.€€Petitioner,€Loretta€Trull,Ïappeals€from€the€order€of€the€chancery€court€dismissing€her€petition€forÏcertiorari€and€affirming€the€decision€of€the€Board€of€Review€that€disallowed€herÏclaim€for€unemployment€compensation€benefits.Ìà àTrull€was€a€machine€operator€for€Kerr€Plastic€Products€(Kerr)€from€AprilÏ1994€to€March€1995.× ƒ ××  ×€€Kerr€has€an€attendance€policy€where€employeesÏaccumulate€points€for€each€absence€or€tardiness€incident.€€An€employee€isÏassessed€six€points€for€a€day€of€absence,€an€additional€three€points€if€thatÏemployee€fails€to€notify€Kerr€of€the€upcoming€absence€at€least€one„half€hourÏprior€to€the€scheduled€start€of€the€shift,€and€two€points€for€any€tardiness.€€AnÍemployee€who€reaches€50€points€is€automatically€terminated.Ìà àOn€March€7,€1995,€Trull€reached€50€points€and,€on€March€9,€1995,€sheÏwas€terminated€for€excessive€absences.€€The€points€were€accumulated€over€aÏthree€month€period,€from€December€1994€through€March€7,€1995.€€TrullððsÏpoints€mostly€resulted€from€family€illnesses€over€that€period€to€herself,€herÏdaughter,€and€her€mother.€€According€to€Beth€Wiseman,€Human€ResourcesÏManager€at€Kerr,€twenty„seven€of€the€points€were€from€Trullððs€illnesses€andÏtwenty„three€were€for€family€emergencies.€€In€addition€to€the€illnesses,€Trull€wasÏtardy€one€day€and€was€absent€one€day€because€of€her€daughterððs€wedding.€€OnÏJanuary€24,€1995,€Trull€received€a€verbal€warning€about€her€point€total.€ÏHowever,€she€accumulated€more€points,€and€on€February€21,€1995,€she€receivedÏa€written€warning.€€On€March€6€and€7,€1995,€Trull€was€absent€because€herÏmother€was€in€intensive€care€at€the€hospital.€€The€only€fact€in€dispute€is€theÏtime€of€a€phone€call€made€by€Trull€on€March€6€to€notify€Kerr€that€her€motherÏwas€ill.€€Kerr€claims€the€call€was€within€one„half€hour€of€Trullððs€scheduled€shiftÏwhich€is€in€violation€of€its€policy€and,€therefore,€they€assessed€her€an€additionalÏthree€points.€€Trull€claims€the€call€was€ten€minutes€earlier€than€Kerr€claims,€andÏshe€should€not€have€been€assessed€the€additional€three€points.€€However,€theÏadditional€points€forced€her€total€over€the€set€level€of€50€points,€and€she€wasÍterminated.€€€€Ìà àKerrððs€policy€does€not€require€medical€proof€of€an€illness,€so€Trull€did€notÏprovide€medical€documentation€for€the€illnesses€or€the€emergencies.€€BasicallyÏKerrððs€policy€is€a€no„fault€policy,€but€the€employee€can€work€off€the€points€if€heÏor€she€works€for€a€period€of€time€without€accumulating€more€points.€€InÏaddition,€a€Kerr€employee€may€request€personal€time€off€or€a€personal€leave€ofÏabsence€to€attend€to€family€emergencies€or€personal€illness€withoutÏaccumulating€points.€€To€be€effective,€the€request€for€a€leave€of€absence€must€beÏin€writing.€€Trull€claims€that€she€attempted€to€request€a€leave€of€absence,Ïhowever,€her€request€was€not€in€writing€and,€therefore,€was€not€honored€byÏKerr.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àTrull€filed€a€claim€for€unemployment€benefits€on€March€22,€1995.€€TheÏTennessee€Department€of€Employment€Security€(TDES)€denied€the€claim€forÏunemployment€benefits€based€on€T.C.A.€ðð€50„7„303(a)(2)€(Supp.€1996).€€TheÏTDES€decision€states:€ð ðClaimant€was€discharged€from€most€recent€employmentÏbecause€of€excessive€tardiness€and/or€absenteeism.€€Evidence€shows€that€thereÏwere€warnings€prior€to€discharge.€€This€is€considered€work„related€misconduct.€ÏClaim€is€denied€under€TCA€50„7„303.ðð€€Trull€appealed€the€denial€and€a€hearingÏwas€held€on€May€11,€1995.€€On€May€16,€1995,€the€Appeals€Tribunal€affirmedÍthe€TDES€decision.€€The€decision€of€the€Appeals€Tribunal€states€in€partÏpertinent€to€this€appeal€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àFINDINGS€OF€FACT:€€The€appeal€was€filed€timely,Ïand€the€Appeals€Tribunal€has€jurisdiction.€€ClaimantððsÏmost€recent€employment€prior€to€filing€this€claim€wasÏwith€Kerr€Plastics€Products,€from€April€8,€1994€untilÏMarch€9,€1995.€€She€was€discharged€for€excessiveÏabsenteeism.€€Claimant€had€worked€for€the€employerÏapproximately€13€months€and€was€absent€or€left€earlyÏ12€times.€€Some€of€the€absences€were€because€ofÏfamily€illness€and€personal€illness.€€None€of€theÏpersonal€illnesses€were€documented€by€a€doctorððsÏstatement.€€On€January€28,€1995,€claimant€received€aÏverbal€warning.€€On€February€24,€1995,€she€received€aÏwritten€warning€about€her€absenteeism.Ìà8 àà8 àCONCLUSIONS€OF€LAW:€€Although€the€claimantÏdid€have€some€mitigating€circumstances€causing€herÏto€miss€scheduled€work,€her€accumulated€absencesÏwere€what€caused€her€to€be€discharged€and€not€anyÏsingle€instance€of€absenteeism.€€Claimant€was€unableÏto€substantiate€with€medical€proof€a€need€to€be€offÏwork.€€Therefore,€the€Appeals€Tribunal€finds€thatÏclaimant€violated€the€very€liberal€attendance€policy€ofÏthe€employer,€and€also€violated€a€duty€she€had€toÏreport€for€scheduled€work€even€after€being€warned.€ÏTherefore,€it€is€found€that€12€attendance€policyÏinfractions€in€a€13€month€period€is€misconduct€underÏTCAÔ€ Ô€ðð€Ô€Ô50„7„303€(a)(2).€€Therefore,€taking€intoÏconsideration€the€strong€agreement€[sic]€of€theÏclaimantððs€counsel,€the€decision€of€the€Agency€whichÏdenied€the€claim€is€affirmed.Ìà8 àà8 àDECISION:€€The€claimant€is€not€eligible€forÏunemployment€benefits€under€TCAÔ€ Ô€ðð€Ô€Ô50„7„303€(a)(2).€ÏThe€claim€is€denied€as€of€the€date€of€filing€and€untilÏthe€claimant€qualifies€for€benefits€in€accordance€withÏthe€Tennessee€Employment€Security€Law.€€€ÓÓÌTrull€appealed€the€Tribunalððs€decision€to€the€TDES€Board€of€Review.€€The€BoardÏof€Review€adopted€the€Tribunalððs€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€andÏaffirmed€the€decision.€€On€July€21,€1995,€Trull€filed€her€petition€for€òòcertiorari€óóinÏthe€Chancery€Court€of€Crockett€County,€and€the€Chancellor€subsequently€foundÏthat€the€Board€of€Reviewððs€decision€was€supported€by€the€evidence,€affirmed€itsÏdecision,€and€dismissed€the€petition.€Trull€has€appealed,€and€presents€the€issuesÏas€follows:€€1)€whether€her€personal€and€family€illness€related€absences€wereÏð ðwork€related€misconductðð€within€the€meaning€of€T.C.A.€ðð€50„7„303(a)(2);€andÏ2)€whether€or€not€misconduct€occurred€because€she€was€mistakenly€assessedÏthree€discipline€points€too€many€and€thus€should€not€have€been€terminatedÏpursuant€to€Kerrððs€own€policy.€€€€The€issue€we€must€decide€is€whether€the€BoardÏof€Reviewððs€decision€that€Trull€is€not€entitled€to€unemployment€compensationÏbenefits€is€supported€by€substantial€and€material€evidence.Ìà àThe€standard€of€judicial€review€applicable€in€unemploymentÏcompensation€benefit€cases€where€the€trial€court€sits€as€an€appellate€court€is€setÏforth€in€T.C.A.€ðð€50„7„304(I)(2)€and€(3)€(Supp.€1996):ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(2)€The€chancellor€may€affirm€the€decision€of€theÏboard,€or€the€chancellor€may€reverse,€remand,€orÏmodify€the€decision€if€the€rights€of€the€petitionerÏhave€been€prejudiced€because€the€administrativeÏfindings,€inferences,€conclusions€or€decisions€are:ÌÌà àà àà à*à à*à à*à à*à à*à à*à à*à àà8 àà8 àÌÌà àà8 àà8 à(E)€Unsupported€by€evidence€which€isÏboth€substantial€and€material€in€the€lightÏof€the€entire€record.Ìà8 àà8 à(3)€€In€determining€the€substantiality€of€evidence,€theÏchancellor€shall€take€into€account€whatever€in€theÏrecord€fairly€detracts€from€its€weight,€but€theÏchancellor€shall€not€substitute€the€chancellorððsÏjudgment€for€that€of€the€board€of€review€as€to€theÏweight€of€the€evidence€on€questions€of€fact.€€NoÏdecision€of€the€board€of€review€shall€be€reversed,Ïremanded,€or€modified€by€the€chancellor€unless€forÏerrors€which€affect€the€merits€of€the€final€decision€ofÏthe€board.ÌÌÓÓSubstantial€and€material€evidence€is€such€relevant€evidence€as€a€reasonable€mindÏmight€accept€to€support€a€rational€conclusion€and€such€as€to€furnish€aÏreasonably€sound€basis€for€the€action€under€consideration.€€òòò òSouthern€Ry.€v.ÏState€Bd.€of€Equalizationó óóó,€682€S.W.2d€196,€199€(Tenn.€1984)€(citationsÏomitted).€€€Courts€should€not€disturb€a€reasonable€decision€of€an€agency€whichÏhas€expertise,€experience€and€knowledge€in€a€particular€field.€€òòò òId.ó óóóÌà àThis€Court€must€apply€the€same€standard€as€the€trial€court€in€reviewingÏthe€trial€court's€decision€in€an€unemployment€compensation€case.€€ò òòòFord€v.ÏTraughberó óóó,€813€S.W.2d€141,€144€(Tenn.€App.€1991).€€In€òòò òSabastian€v.€Bibleó óóó,€649ÏS.W.2d€593,€594„5€(Tenn.€App.€1983),€we€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIn€order€to€sustain€the€Board€of€Review's€applicationÏof€the€provisions€of€the€statute,€we€need€not€find€thatÍits€construction€is€the€only€reasonable€one€or€evenÏthat€it€is€the€result€we€would€have€reached€had€theÏquestion€arisen€in€the€first€instance€in€a€judicialÏproceeding.€€€The€reviewing€court's€function€is€severelyÏlimited.€€€All€that€is€needed€to€support€theÏcommission's€interpretation€is€that€it€has€warrant€inÏthe€record€and€a€reasonable€basis€in€law.€€€ÌÌÓÓà àThe€Board's€ruling€disqualifying€Trull€for€benefits€was€based€upon€T.C.A.€ððÏ50„7„303(a)(2)€(Supp.€1996)€which€we€quote€in€pertinent€part:Ìò òÓÓà8 àà8 à50„7„303.€€Disqualification€for€benefits.€„„€ó ó(a)ÏDisqualifying€Events.€€€A€claimant€shall€be€disqualifiedÏfor€benefits:€€Ìà8 àà8 à(2)€If€the€commissioner€finds€that€the€claimant€hasÏbeen€discharged€from€such€claimantððs€most€recentÏwork€for€misconduct€connected€with€such€claimantððsÏwork,€such€disqualification€shall€be€for€the€duration€ofÏthe€ensuing€period€of€unemployment€and€until€suchÏclaimant€has€secured€subsequent€employment€.€.€.€.ððÌÌÓÓà àTrull€was€terminated€by€Kerr€because€repeated€absences€and€tardinessÏcaused€her€to€accumulate€50€points,€the€termination€level€under€Kerrððs€policy.€ÏTrull€argues€that€her€absences€for€family€and€personal€illness€were€beyond€herÏcontrol,€and€therefore,€not€misconduct.€€Trull€does€not€dispute€that€she€wasÏabsent,€but,€instead€contends€that€her€absences€were€not€work„relatedÏmisconduct.Ìà àThe€unemployment€compensation€statutes€were€enacted€for€the€benefitÏof€the€unemployed,€and€since€the€disqualification€for€benefits€because€ofÍmisconduct€connected€with€work€is€penal€in€nature,€a€liberal€construction€ofÏthe€statute€in€favor€of€the€employee€is€required.€€ò òòòWeaver€v.€Wallaceóóó ó,€565ÏS.W.2d€867,€869„70€(Tenn.€1978);€ò òòòMiotke€v.€Kelleyóóó ó,€713€S.W.2d€910,€913Ï(Tenn.€App.€1986).€€The€General€Assembly€did€not€provide€a€definition€ofÏmisconduct€connected€with€employment.€€Therefore,€misconduct€within€theÏmeaning€of€T.C.A.€Ô€ Ôðð€Ô€Ô50„7„303(a)(2)€must€be€determined€on€a€case€by€case€basis.€Ïòòò òMiotkeóóó ó,€713€S.W.2d€at€913.€€€The€burden€of€proving€the€disqualification€forÏbenefits€rests€on€the€employer.€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€€Ìà àExcessive€absenteeism€may€be€the€basis€of€a€finding€of€misconductÏwarranting€the€denial€of€unemployment€benefits,€but€that€level€of€absenteeismÏmust€be€determined€on€an€ad€hoc€basis.€€ò òòòWallace€v.€Stewartó óóó,€559€S.W.2d€647,Ï648€(Tenn.€1977),€ò òòòMiotkeóóó ó,€713€S.W.2d€at€913.€€In€ò òòòWallaceóóó ó,€the€Supreme€CourtÏconsidered€whether€absenteeism€could€be€misconduct:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àNo€aspect€of€contract€of€employment€is€moreÏbasic€than€the€right€of€the€employer€to€expectÏemployees€will€appear€for€work€on€the€day€and€at€theÏhour€agreed€upon.€€Persistent€failure€to€honor€thatÏobligation€evinces€a€substantial€disregard€for€theÏemployerððs€interest€and€may€justify€a€finding€ofÏmisconduct€connected€with€the€employment.ÌÌò òòòÓÓWallaceóóó ó,€559€S.W.2d€at€648.Ì€€à àWhile€unexcused€and€unjustified€absenteeism€can€be€a€basis€for€findingÍmisconduct,€absences€due€to€illnesses€and€job€injuries€do€not€constituteÏmisconduct€under€the€Employment€Security€Law.€€òòò òSimmons€v.€Traughberóóó ó,€791ÏS.W.2d€21,€26€(Tenn.€1990).€€Trull€relies€on€òòò òSimmonsóóó ó€to€establish€that€herÏabsences€were€not€misconduct.€€In€òòò òSimmonsóóó ó,€the€Supreme€Court€remanded€theÏcause€to€TDES€for€a€new€hearing.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€26.€€However,€the€Court€remanded€theÏcase€because€the€plaintiff€was€prejudiced€by€lack€of€counsel€not€because€some€ofÏthe€plaintiffððs€absences€were€excused.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€€The€Supreme€Court€stated€that€ð ð[a]Ïcompetent€attorney,€through€efficient€cross„examination€and€introduction€ofÏmedical€records,€may€have€been€able€to€show€that€Plaintiff€was€absent€soÏfrequently€because€of€injuries€and€poor€health.ðð€€òòò òId.óóó óÌà àIn€the€instant€case,€Trull€was€properly€represented€by€counsel€andÏpresented€witnesses€and€evidence.€€However,€the€agency,€the€Appeals€Tribunal,Ïthe€Board€of€Review,€and€the€chancery€court€all€felt€that€Kerr€had€carried€itsÏburden€of€proving€that€her€excessive€absenteeism€was€misconduct.€€We€believeÏthat€substantial€and€material€evidence€supports€the€Boardððs€decision€that€TrullððsÏpattern€of€absences€and€tardiness€constituted€misconduct€related€to€her€work.€ÏLike€the€Appeals€Tribunal€and€the€Board€of€Review,€we€believe€that€sheÏð ðviolated€the€very€liberal€attendance€policy€of€the€employer,€and€also€violated€aÏduty€she€had€to€report€for€scheduled€work€even€after€being€warned.ðð€Ìà àTrull€was€terminated€after€she€reached€Kerrððs€policy€level€of€50€points.€ÏOnly€twenty„seven€of€those€points€were€for€her€own€illnesses.€€We€do€notÏbelieve€that€an€absence€to€attend€to€an€adult€daughterððs€illness€or€to€participateÏin€the€daughterððs€wedding€is€excusable.€€In€addition,€Kerr€provided€a€policy€thatÏallowed€employees€to€take€a€personal€leave€of€absence€when€confronted€with€aÏfamily€crisis€like€Trull€faced€when€her€mother€was€in€intensive€care.€€However,ÏTrull€did€not€follow€Kerrððs€policy€and€did€not€appear€for€work.€€Although€theÏcause€of€the€absences€is€unfortunate,€Trullððs€inability€to€follow€Kerrððs€policyÏresulted€in€her€termination.€€These€absences€are€part€of€a€pattern€of€actions€byÏTrull€that€show€a€ð ðsubstantial€disregard€for€the€employerððs€interest.ðð€€òòò òWallaceó óóó,Ï559€S.W.2d€at€648.€Ìà àFrom€our€examination€of€the€entire€record,€we€find€substantial€andÏmaterial€evidence€to€support€the€decision€of€the€Board€of€Review€that€TrullððsÏabsences€and€tardiness€constituted€misconduct€related€to€her€work€as€providedÏin€T.C.A.€ðð€50„7„303(a)(2)€(Supp.€1996).€€The€judgment€of€the€chancery€court€isÏaffirmed,€and€the€costs€of€this€appeal€are€assessed€against€Trull.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÌò òCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEó óÌÌ_________________________________Ìò òHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.ÌSENIOR€JUDGEó ó̜ԀÔ