The New York City Commissioner of Health and Mental Hygiene had mandated that all New York City employees, with exceptions not relevant in the instant action, obtain a COVID-19 vaccination. Claimant, an emergency medical technician for the New York City Fire Department [NYFD], sought a religious exemption from the mandate. NYFD denied Claimant's application and after Claimant failed to provide proof of vaccination, NYFD terminated his employment.
Claimant's subsequent application for unemployment insurance benefits was denied by the New York City Department of Labor, which decision was affirmed after a hearing by an Administrative Law Judge [ALJ].
After a series of administrative appeals, Claimant was ultimately found to have failed to demonstrate that "his noncompliance with the COVID-19 vaccination mandate was rooted in a sincerely held religious belief and, therefore, his voluntary separation from employment was without good cause". Claimant appealed.
The Appellate Division, noting that whether a claimant has good cause to leave their employment and whether their conduct is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, are factual issues for the Unemployment Appeals Board [Board] to resolve and "the Board's determination will be sustained if supported by substantial evidence".
Deferring to the Board's credibility assessments and the inferences to be drawn from Claimant's varied testimony and submissions in his effort to excused from the New York City Commissioner of Health and Mental Hygiene's COVID-19 mandate, the Appellate Division found that substantial evidence supported the Board's determination.
In the words of the Appellate Division, "given [Claimant's] inconsistent testimony and admission to taking vaccines in the past and willingness to take them in the future, it was reasonable for the Board to conclude that [Claimant's] refusal to comply with the vaccination mandate was for personal and secular reasons, including safety concerns, rather than for sincerely held religious beliefs and, therefore, that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause".
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.