Bill is tough on employee misconduct

OLYMPIA — Losing a job because you’re in jail or drunk shouldn’t qualify you for unemployment insurance, two state lawmakers say, and they’re pushing two bills in Olympia to ban such payments.

Senate Bill 6608, sponsored by Sen. Bob McCaslin, R-Spokane Valley and three other lawmakers, would disqualify a worker from getting unemployment benefits if he or she is jailed and fails to report for work within 24 hours.

The bill is a response to the case of a Mercer Island supermarket worker named Sammy Barker. In 2002, according to court records, Barker’s girlfriend threw him out, tossing his clothes into the street and getting a no-contact order.

With her permission, Barker later returned to pick up his belongings. But the two argued. She called police, who jailed Barker for violating the no-contact order. He tried to call the supermarket, according to court records, but the store rejected his collect call from the jail. When he was released from jail after two weeks, he learned that he’d been fired for missing work. The store, QFC, told him that they assumed he’d quit.

Barker sought unemployment benefits. An administrative law judge found that his firing was “attributable to unanticipated circumstances,” not misconduct, and that therefore Barker was entitled to unemployment payments.

Last April, a state court of appeals upheld that decision, saying that circumstances beyond Barker’s control couldn’t be used to disqualify him.

McCaslin’s bill would change that in future such cases. Under SB 6608, anyone jailed who fails to report to work for 24 hours is automatically disqualified from seeking unemployment benefits if fired. The worker would be considered to have voluntarily quit the job.

The second bill, House Bill 2734, declares that it is misconduct for an employee to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol while driving or being in a “safety sensitive position” on the job. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Jim Clements, R-Selah, and two other Republicans.

The state’s unemployment compensation law, which was rewritten at the start of 2004, lists 11 examples of employee misconduct, such as deliberate violations of workplace rules. But drug and alcohol use are not mentioned, except to say that an employee cannot seek unemployment benefits on the basis of alcoholism.

According to a House of Representatives report on Clements’ bill, there have been no published decisions by state appeals judges or the Supreme Court since 2004 that have addressed rejection of unemployment claims due to misconduct involving drugs or alcohol. But in 2000, an unpublished opinion by the state Court of Appeals upheld denial of benefits for a deli clerk fired for being drunk on the job.