Date Mailed: September 28, 2005

Ruth A. Matthews, Ouray, Co 81427

Employer: ADP TotalSource Co XXII, ADP UCS, Diamond Bar, Ca 91765

Appearances: This hearing was held September 22, 2005, in Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Ruth Matthews, the claimant, appeared in person. Gary Duncan appeared as a witness on her behalf. The employer was represented by telephone by Linda Minter, Owner/Manager; Delinda Austin, Manager's Assistant; Tanya Hawk, former Front Desk Clerk; and Tammy Miyahata, Employer Representative.

Finding of Facts: The claimant appealed a decision of the deputy which disqualified her from the receipt of benefits under Section 8-73-108 (5)(e)(IV) of the Colorado Employment Security Act. The deputy found the claimant quit this employment to move to another area. Her maximum benefits were reduced by the amount attributable to this employment and payment of any remaining benefits was postponed for ten weeks, from April 24, 2005, through July 2, 2005.

The hearing officer must determine whether the claimant is entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits, under Colorado law, based on the reason for her separation from this employment. The hearing officer reverses the deputy's decision and remands the issue of the claimant's ability to work to the deputy.

The claimant was employed as a front desk clerk from September 2001 through March 10, 2005. She worked full-time and was paid $9.50 per hour. Linda Minter, Owner/Manager, supervised the claimant.

The claimant quit this job because she developed a hypersensitivity to electromagnetic fields and could not continue working in the physical environment of the lodge and spa. Not only did the claimant leave her job, but she also found it necessary to move out of her apartment and find somewhere to live without electric power in the area. By the fall of 2004 the claimant found she could not sleep in her apartment, but remained awake all night. She tried sleeping in various rooms at the lodge, but found she also could not sleep there. The claimant sometimes drove her car out to back roads and slept in her car.

The claimant spoke with a doctor and with her witness who has experience in issues with electromagnetic fields. Both of them recommended she leave her apartment and her job so that she would not be exposed to the electromagnetic fields. The claimant continued working, trying to find a solution. However, she finally decided in February that she could not continue working. The claimant gave her notice of resignation to the owner and explained her reason for leaving employment. The owner attempted to make accommodations for the claimant, but these did not work. The claimant found her chest tightened when she was exposed to electricity. During her last week of employment the employer purchased a new computer which emitted less of an electromagnetic field,and the claimant turned off the electricity to her work area except when it was necessary to use the computer and credit card machine. This was an awkward working situation and did not completely resolve the problem.

The claimant is now unable to work in an office environment, the type of work she has always performed. She is not certain what type of work she can now do..

Conclusion: The hearing officer concludes the claimant quit this employment because she developed a physical condition which made working conditions unsatisfactory for her. While the working conditions where normal for this type of work, they were unsatisfactory for the claimant because of her hypersensitivity to electromagnetic fields which makes her unable to work in an office environment. This causes a high degree of risk to her health. The Colorado Employment Security Act provides for a full award of benefits under these circumstances. The issue of the claimant's ability to seek and accept suitable employment will be remanded to the deputy for any action necessary.

Decision: It is determined that the claimant is not at fault for the separation from this employment. A full award of benefits is granted under Section 8-73-108 (4)(c), C.R.S.

The hearing officer reverses the deputy's decision.

The issue of the claimant's ability to seek and accept suitable employment, and the effect on her eligibility for unemployment insurance benefits, is hereby remanded to the deputy for any action necessary.