Peterson v. Securitas Security Serv.
2021 Ohio 3254
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- Peterson worked as a Securitas security officer at a single P&G site (Feb 2018–Dec 2019) and had several prior counseling notices for attendance and conduct.
- She called off Dec 16–18, 2019 (reported illness/urgent care); she was a no-call/no-show for scheduled shifts Dec 24–26, 2019.
- Securitas policy (handbook) treats three consecutive no-call/no-shows as an automatic resignation; Securitas sent a certified letter to Peterson Dec 30, 2019.
- Peterson filed for unemployment Dec 23, 2019; ODJFS initially allowed benefits, then redetermined in Peterson’s favor, Securitas appealed to the UCRC.
- After hearings (testimony from HR and supervisors vs. Peterson and her daughter), the hearing officer and then the UCRC found Peterson was discharged for just cause; the trial court affirmed and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether discharge was for just cause based on 3-day no-call/no-show | Peterson says she was verbally fired Dec 16 (so later absences were irrelevant) | Securitas says policy treats 3 consecutive no-call/no-shows as resignation; HR processed termination after absences | Affirmed: record supports employer testimony and UCRC credibility findings; discharge for just cause. |
| Whether employer failed to notify or required to contact Peterson about schedule | Peterson contends employer didn’t properly inform or follow up | Securitas: post assignments have fixed schedules; handbook governs attendance | Held: Court rejected Peterson; schedule/handbook evidence supports employer. |
| Whether trial court could consider additional texts/voicemails/phone records not in UCRC record | Peterson submitted texts/phone records to trial court | Director/Securitas: court limited to certified UCRC record per statute | Held: Trial court correctly limited review to the certified administrative record; extra evidence not considered. |
| Credibility of alleged verbal termination (daughter’s testimony) | Daughter testified she heard a male voice tell Peterson she was fired | Employer witnesses denied verbally firing Peterson and denied using profanity; daughter could not identify date or speaker | Held: Hearing officer found employer witnesses more credible; appellate court accepts credibility findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tzangas, Plakas & Mannos v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Servs., 73 Ohio St.3d 694, 653 N.E.2d 1207 (1995) (appellate standard: reverse UCRC only if decision is unlawful, unreasonable, or against the manifest weight of the evidence)
- Irvine v. State Unemp. Comp. Bd. of Rev., 19 Ohio St.3d 15, 482 N.E.2d 587 (1985) (definition and approach to statutory "just cause")
- Williams v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 129 Ohio St.3d 332, 951 N.E.2d 1031 (2011) (fault by employee removes Act's protection; fault is central to just-cause analysis)
- Peyton v. Sun T.V., 44 Ohio App.2d 10, 335 N.E.2d 751 (1975) (traditional formulation of just cause as a justifiable reason to do or not do an act)