Darren Williams v. Director, Department of Workforce Services ( 2024 )

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 157ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. E-22-612
Opinion Delivered February 28, 2024
DARREN WILLIAMS
APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
BOARD OF REVIEW
V.
[NO. 2022-BR-01027]
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
WORKFORCE SERVICES REMANDED TO SETTLE AND
APPELLEE SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD
WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge
Appellant, Darren Williams (Williams), appeals an adverse ruling of the Board of
Review (Board) affirming an Appeal Tribunal (Tribunal) determination denying him
unemployment benefits. Due to deficiencies in the record, we remand to settle and
supplement the record.
In this unbriefed unemployment case, Williams was issued a notice of agency
determination on March 3, 2022, denying him benefits under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-10-514(Supp. 2023) on finding that Williams was discharged from last work for misconduct
connected with the work. In response, Williams filed a timely appeal of this determination
to the Appeal Tribunal, which conducted a hearing on March 23, 2022, and affirmed the
Division’s determination denying Williams benefits in appeal No. 2022-AT-01938. Williams
timely appealed to the Board from the decision of the Tribunal. The Board, in appeal No.
2022-BR-01027, adopted and affirmed the Tribunal’s decision.
According to the record, Williams worked as an associate machine operator at Denso
MFG AR (the employer) for over four years and four months from April 2017 to August 27,
2021.1 He was advised about the written attendance policy with an occurrence and point
system. The policy was no-fault on a rolling twelve-month period and specified 12 points to
be recommended for discharge. According to testimony, Williams accrued 20.5 points due
to health issues. After attending an internal hearing regarding his absenteeism, he was let go.
Before this court, Williams ostensibly contends that his absenteeism was due to health
reasons, however, such reasons do not matter under a no-fault policy. As a result, Williams
was discharged from employment due to excessive absenteeism, which was a violation of the
written attendance policy and against the employers’ interest.
Although we agree with the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, we do
not reach the merits of this appeal and instead order rebriefing due to deficiencies within
the record. From our review, page 7 within the record is a copy of appeal No. 2022-AT-
01939, which is not associated with the current appeal. While it does not appear that such
documentation was relied on to reach a determination, to eliminate any room for error, we
remand to settle and supplement the record. A correct record is essential to a proper review
1
Williams’s effective end date was 09/14/21.
2
of the pending issues.2 In the event of a material omission or misstatement, we may sua
sponte direct the record to be settled.3 As such, this case is remanded to the Board to settle
and supplement the record to remedy any deficiencies. The supplemental record shall be
returned within thirty days of this order.4
Remanded to settle and supplement the record.
KLAPPENBACH and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Darren Williams, pro se appellant.
Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, Associate General Counsel, for appellee.
2
See Van Venrooij v. Dir., 2021 Ark. App. 213.
3
Abbott v. Dir., 2015 Ark. App. 221.
4
Nance v. Dir., 2023 Ark. App. 187, at 2.
3