A recent Arizona Supreme Court (Barriga v. ADES/Precision) decision has broadened the circumstances that can establish intolerable work conditions in order to receive unemployment benefits after quitting. The key issue in this case involved the interpretation of regulations governing intolerable work conditions due to inharmonious relations with fellow employees.

Case Facts

In the case discussed, Pedro Barriga (“Barriga”) left his job at Precision Auto Body, LLC (“Precision”) due to an ongoing dispute with a fellow employee over the placement of a cooler. Barriga needed the cooler near him because of a medical condition. After leaving his job, Barriga applied for unemployment benefits, citing inharmonious relations with his fellow employee, which Precision challenged. ADES denied Barriga unemployment benefits.

Existing Law

Former employees who quit for good cause may be entitled to unemployment benefits administered by the Arizona Department of Economic Security (ADES). Good cause means the working conditions were “substantially below those prevailing in the area for similar work.” R6-3-50515(A)(2). To preserve a claim for unemployment benefits before quitting, an employee must inform the employer of the precise nature of the complaint and give the employer a reasonable opportunity to investigate and decide whether corrective measures are needed.”

“Working conditions” includes an employee’s relations with coworkers and supervisors. As such, inharmonious relations with fellow employees may establish good cause to quit. In determining inharmonious relations, regulations set forth two considerations— (1) would continued employment create a severe nervous strain or result in physical alteration and (2) was the employee subjected to extreme verbal abuse or profanity.

Holding

In Barriga’s case, ADES argued that the two considerations in the regulations constituted the exclusive considerations. Such an interpretation meant that unless former employees proved the two considerations, they could not establish good cause. The Arizona Supreme Court disagreed, holding the two considerations in the regulations do not “cover the entire universe of circumstances that could constitute an intolerable work situation” due to inharmonious relations. A former employee may prove intolerable work conditions by any number of sufficiently egregious facts. Although the Court found that Barriga’s allegations failed to establish inharmonious relations, the decision broadened a former employee’s ability to prove inharmonious relations to receive unemployment benefits.

Important Takeaways

First, employees must preserve a claim that they quit for cause by informing the employer and giving the employer a reasonable opportunity to investigate. Second, former employees may obtain unemployment benefits if they quit for good cause due to intolerable work conditions. Third, employees may establish intolerable work conditions due to inharmonious relations through any set of egregious circumstances.