Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Totman v School District of Royal Oak 15.28

Section 29(8)

LABOR DISPUTE, Direct involvement, Non-union member, Unemployment notice

CITE AS: Totman v School District of Royal Oak, No. 83-259-023 AE, Oakland Circuit Court (December 21, 1984).

Appeal pending: No

Claimant: Frederick H. Totman

Employer: School District of Royal Oak

Docket No: B82 60001 88326W

CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Claimant was unemployed in an establishment where he last worked as a result of a labor dispute.

FACTS: Claimant, a non-union teacher, received an unemployment notice from the employer with no explanation detailed thereon. A strike had been called against the district. Claimant argues that he should not be disqualified, since he was not involved or interested in the labor dispute.

DECISION: Claimant is disqualified under the labor dispute provision of the Act.

RATIONALE: Section 29(8) provides four bases for determining direct involvement in a labor dispute. To establish disqualification, the unemployment [must] be due to a labor dispute in the establishment at which claimant is employed and claimant's unemployment is caused by the dispute. There is no requirement that claimant be directly notified that his unemployment is caused by a strike.


1, 6, d14:NA

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page