Valdez v. MVM SECURITY, INC.
349 S.W.3d 450
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Valdez worked as a security guard for eight years; his firm was acquired by MVM in February 2009.
- Valdez’s duties included front-desk security, ID checks, and armed security; he was required to pass annual shooting proficiency tests.
- In 2010, federal authorities raised the qualifying score to 200; Valdez’s top test score after four attempts was 188.
- MVM discharged Valdez on June 18, 2010, after he failed to qualify; he applied for unemployment benefits, which were initially denied for voluntary quit.
- Tribunal found Valdez quit for reasons not attributable to work or employer; Commission adopted that finding.
- Court reviews whether Valdez’s termination was a voluntary quit; argues the discharge was involuntary and remands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Valdez voluntarily quit without good cause? | Valdez did not quit; his discharge was involuntary due to the testing change. | Valdez left voluntarily because he failed the required test and thus left without good cause attributable to work. | Valdez did not voluntarily quit; the discharge was involuntary; remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Difatta-Wheaton v. Dolphin Capital Corp., 271 S.W.3d 594 (Mo. banc 2008) (defines voluntariness and no-fault in unemployment context)
- Johnson v. Div. of Emp't Sec., 318 S.W.3d 797 (Mo.App.2010) (de novo review of voluntariness; factual findings)
- Board of Education, 633 S.W.2d 126 (Mo.App.1982) (voluntary quit when job clearly finite; contingent certification)
- O'Neal v. Maranatha Village Inc., 314 S.W.3d 779 (Mo.App.2010) (distinguished; temporary-certification context)
- Davis v. Transp. Sec. & Div. of Emp't. Sec., 295 S.W.3d 594 (Mo.App.2009) (awards compensation when employee loses position due to uncontrollable circumstances)
- Sokol v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm'n of Mo., 946 S.W.2d 20 (Mo.App.1997) (scope of review for Commission findings; substantial evidence standard)