This opinion will be unpublished and

may not be cited except as provided by

Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2004).








Georgiana M. Nehmzow,





Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc.,



Department of Employment and Economic Development,




Filed August 15, 2006


Worke, Judge


Department of Employment and Economic Development

File No. 1181905



Georgiana M. Nehmzow, 1508 103rd Avenue Northwest, Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (pro se relator)


Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc., c/o TALX Employer Services, LLC, P. O. Box 1160, Columbus, OH  43216-1160 (respondent)


Linda A. Holmes, Department of Employment and Economic Development, 332 Minnesota Street, Suite E200, St. Paul, MN 55101-1351 (for respondent department)



            Considered and decided by Worke, Presiding Judge; Kalitowski, Judge; and Hudson, Judge.

U N P U B L I S H E D   O P I N I O N

WORKE, Judge

Relator Georgiana M. Nehmzow challenges the decision of the unemployment-law judge (ULJ) that she is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits, having quit her employment without a good reason caused by her employer.  Because the decision was supported by substantial evidence and not affected by error of law, we affirm.


This court may reverse or modify the ULJ’s decision if the substantial rights of the petitioner may have been prejudiced because the decision is unsupported by substantial evidence or affected by error of law.  Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(d) (Supp. 2005). 

Relator was employed as a cook for respondent Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc. from March 25, 2004 until July 1, 2005, when she quit.  Respondent Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) initially denied relator’s application for unemployment benefits, and relator appealed.  Following a hearing before the ULJ, the ULJ found that relator felt that she was abused, harassed, and treated unfairly, but concluded that the record did not show any abuse, harassment, or unfair treatment.  Relator filed a request for reconsideration, and the ULJ affirmed that the decision was factually and legally correct.   

An employee who quits without good reason caused by the employer is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.  Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 1(1) (2004). 

A good reason caused by the employer for quitting is a reason: (1) that is directly related to the employment and for which the employer is responsible; (2) that is adverse to the worker; and (3) that would compel an average, reasonable worker to quit and become unemployed rather than remaining in the employment. 


Id., subd. 3(a) (2004).

“What constitutes good reason caused by the employer is defined exclusively by statute.”  Rootes v. Wal-Mart Assocs., Inc., 669 N.W.2d 416, 418 (Minn. App. 2003).  “A good personal reason does not equate with good cause” to quit.  Kehoe v. Minn. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 568 N.W.2d 889, 891 (Minn. App. 1997).  The issue is whether “the employer made unreasonable demands of [the] employee that no one person could be expected to meet.”  See Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., 272 N.W.2d 262, 263 (Minn. 1978) (holding that the employee had good reason to quit when the employer more than doubled his workload and work hours over a two-year period).  The analysis must be applied to the specific facts of the case.  Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 3(b) (2004). 

The ULJ asked relator how she was treated unfairly, and relator testified that on three occasions the center’s director yelled at her in front of teachers and children.  The first incident took place in the director’s office shortly after relator started working.  Relator claims that the director and two others yelled at her about “not doing a bus run.” The second incident took place in a classroom in front of some children and a teacher.  Relator claims that the director yelled at her about ordering more food for the center.  The third incident was on May 23, 2005, when relator went into the infant room while the freezer was being repaired.  Relator claims that the director questioned what she was doing in front of the teacher and students.  Relator provided no other incidents supporting her claim of unfair treatment.  Relator quit after the May 23 incident because of her perception of the unpleasant work atmosphere and the lack of fairness, dignity, and respect she received from the director.

The record does not support relator’s allegations that the director yelled at her on these occasions.  There also is no showing that the director inappropriately or unreasonably raised these three issues with relator.  Similarly, relator’s written claims of the director mistreating children, miscounting meals, and causing her depression, were not corroborated nor do they provide an independent basis to show good reason to quit.  Relator had an opportunity to subpoena witnesses and to provide the ULJ with more facts at the hearing, but failed to do so.  This court’s review is limited to the facts adduced at the hearing before the ULJ at the time of its decision.  Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 115.04.  On this record, we agree with the ULJ that relator was not abused, harassed, or treated unfairly, and because she did not quit for good reason caused by her employer, she is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.