Trans-Tel had to Lay me off or should of.

The Vance job, I was assigned to at the beginning of April was nothing but a financial FUBAR.

They assigned me to a job on the road with no intention of reimbursing for reasonable travel expenses. It took me about 6 weeks to go broke. After I submitted my expense reports, Mark Sorrels notified me that I would not, be reimbursed. I do not have the luxury of tax deductions due, to the fact that I pay child support.

Eliminating reimbursements for expenses I used to get puts me in a pay-to-work configuration; I cannot afford to volunteer. A 23-78% reduction in pay equates to "WTF am I doing here".

I requested to be laid-off, which is normal practice when a company can no longer afford employees but they will make you quit or they will try.

Looking back my whole experience with this company was a joke. They got me to sign on way under paid under the guise for internship and then drug me out until this horse (Me) dropped dead and force me to quit.

I appealed to the State of Oklahoma and had my hearing on Thursday. Now I’m in a 14 day waiting period for the determination to come out.

Case Applications Oklahoma

82 AT 9295; 83 BR 202

Facts: The employer eliminated claimant’s per diem allowance because of depressed conditions in the oil and gas industry. Claimant would have incurred a loss of $147 every two weeks.

Held: There was a good economic reason for the reduction, but the reduction was an adverse change in the hiring agreement. Good cause shown.

Result: Benefits allowed.

---------------------------------------------------------

R & R Engineering Co. v. OESC, Bd of Review and Gilbert V. Farris, 737 P2d 118 (Okla. 1987)

History: Board of Review allowed benefits; employer appealed to District Court; District Court of Rogers County affirmed; employer appealed to Supreme Court.

Facts:

1. Farris voluntarily resigned after being informed that he would receive a 16 2/3% reduction in pay due to poor economic conditions.

2. All of the employees of R & R received cuts in pay. Farris was the only one who resigned as a result, of the pay reductions.

3. Other employees had larger reductions in their pay.

Issue: What is the correct standard of review for administrative decision.

Holding: Commission’s findings that employee had resigned for “good cause” and thus
would not be disqualified for benefits would be presumed correct, and not
disturbed on appeal, whether based on determination that reduction in pay was
substantial or on other factors involved.

---------------------------------------------------------

84 BR 8447

Facts: Claimant was laid off due to a lack of work. He received benefits. All base period employers were notified of the charging of benefits wages after the second benefit check
was paid. The employer protested stating that the employee was eligible for rehire.
Work was available, but the commute was 80 to 90 miles. Claimant refused the rehire.

Held: Distance is good cause for refusing employment.

Result: Benefits allowed.

_____________________________

I have more cases but that's enough for now. These are some of the things going thru my

head right now. Time to get back to work on the Deck.

Hyper