Mr. Bailey requested a housekeeping job but this was the only position available for him.

Mr. Bailey asserted that he attempted to work in the new position but that he was unable to continue due to his medical limitations. He notified his supervisor that he was unable to continue working, went back to Mountaire's human resources department and voluntarily resigned.

Mountaire told Mr. Bailey that it did not want to lose him, and Mr. Bailey signed a document stating that he was leaving on good terms so he could be rehired by Mountaire.

On November 18, 2018, Mr. Bailey applied for unemployment compensation benefits. The claims deputy determined that Mr. Bailey was disqualified from receiving benefits because he had voluntarily terminated his employment without good cause attributable to his employment.

Mr. Bailey appealed to an appeals referee, who affirmed the claims deputy's decision, finding that Mr. Bailey had not provided sufficient evidence that there was good cause to leave his employment.

Mr. Bailey appealed the referee's decision to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The board affirmed the referee's decision, finding that Mr. Bailey had voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his work and, therefore, that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.

Mr. Bailey went to court to appeal the board's decision. He argued that he had not voluntarily quit his job without good cause and, therefore, that he was entitled to unemployment benefits.

The Court's Decision

The court affirmed.

In its decision, the court explained that, pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 3314(1), a person did not qualify for unemployment benefits where he or she left work "voluntarily without good cause attributable to such work." The court added that good cause was established where:

• The employee voluntarily left employment for reasons attributable to issues within the employer's control and under circumstances in which no reasonably prudent employee would have remained employed; and
• The employee exhausted all reasonable alternatives to resolve the issues before voluntarily terminating his or her employment.

Finding no dispute as to whether Mr. Bailey had voluntarily left his employment, the court considered whether he had done so without good cause.

The court pointed out that Mr. Bailey resigned because his medical limitations made it difficult to continue work. The court found, however, that Mr. Bailey failed to show that he was "medically restricted from the duties his new job entailed" or that his new job duties were "unreasonable" to justify good cause.

Moreover, the court continued, Mr. Bailey did not have a doctor's order to stop working in the new job to which Mountaire moved him.

Therefore, the court ruled, the board, based on the evidence, had correctly determined that Mr. Bailey had not shown that the conditions of the job were unreasonable, finding that he only showed that he was uncomfortable in his job. This was "insufficient to establish good cause," the court ruled.

Accordingly, the court concluded that the board's decision that Mr. Bailey left his employment without good cause was supported by substantial evidence.

The case is Bailey v. Mountaire Farms of DE Inc., No. S19A-03-002 RFS (Del. Super. Ct. Sep. 13, 2019). Attorneys involved include: Barry M. Willoughby, Esq., and Lauren E.M. Russell, Esq., Wilmington DE, Attorneys for Appellee, Mountaire Farms. Daniel C. Mulveny, Esq., and Victoria W. Counihan, Esq., Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorneys for Appellee, Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.