Richardson v. Division of Employment Security
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1518
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Claimant Dawn Richardson was employed as a certified nurse's aide at Seniortrust of Columbia, LLC from July 26, 2007 to April 8, 2010.
- On April 7, 2010, Richardson, the sole night-shift worker in the Alzheimer's unit, attempted to call in sick after seafood allergy symptoms but was told by her supervisor not to call off so close to her shift.
- Richardson arrived at work after taking Benadryl for the allergic reaction and slept at her desk during the shift, which the Director of Nursing deemed unacceptable.
- Richardson was sent home that night and subsequently discharged the next day for alleged misconduct related to work.
- The Division of Employment Security initially disqualified Richardson from unemployment benefits for five weeks, based on misconduct connected with work.
- The Appeals Tribunal and the Labor & Industrial Relations Commission upheld the determination; Richardson appealed to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sleeping on the job constitutes misconduct as a matter of law | Richardson argues sleep on duty requires weighing circumstances, not per se misconduct. | Seniortrust contends sleeping on the job is misconduct under § 288.030.1(23). | Not per se misconduct; must consider facts and circumstances. |
| Whether taking Benadryl, under supervisor direction, can be misconduct | Benadryl taken due to supervisor instruction cannot be misconduct. | Benadryl use was misconduct absent evidence of impairment and supervisory direction. | Misconduct not established when medication taken per supervisor and allergy context exists. |
| Whether the Commission erred by not addressing whether Richardson's sleeping was misconduct | Commission failed to determine if sleeping on the job was misconduct under § 288.030.1(23). | Commission relied on general findings; did not separately analyze sleeping misconduct. | Remanded for further proceedings to determine if sleeping on the job amounts to misconduct. |
Key Cases Cited
- Higgins v. Missouri Div. of Employment Sec., 167 S.W.3d 275 (Mo.App. W.D.2005) (affirm agency findings with substantial evidence; deference to credibility)
- Hampton v. Big Boy Steel Erection, 121 S.W.3d 220 (Mo. banc 2003) (standard for reviewing agency decisions; statutory interpretation)
- Mathews v. B & K Foods, Inc., 332 S.W.3d 273 (Mo.App. S.D.2011) (work-related misconduct requires willful violation of employer standards)
- West v. Baldor Elec. Co., 326 S.W.3d 843 (Mo.App. E.D.2010) (willful misconduct; conscious disregard frontier)
- Nickless v. Saint Gobain Containers, Inc., 350 S.W.3d 871 (Mo.App. E.D.2011) (sleeping on the job per se misconduct; limited exception noted)
- Johnson v. Division of Emp't Sec., 318 S.W.3d 797 (Mo.App. W.D.2010) (circumstances may affect whether sleep constitutes misconduct)