Utah Court of Appeals
Do temporary employees voluntarily quit when they fail to report availability? SOS Staffing Services v. Department of Workforce Services Explained
Summary
SOS Staffing employed temporary workers who were required to report their availability for new assignments after completing each job. Two employees, Gray and Lowrey, completed their assignments and moved to Nevada without reporting their availability. The Workforce Appeals Board determined they were discharged due to reduction in force and entitled to unemployment benefits.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
In SOS Staffing Services v. Department of Workforce Services, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether temporary employees who fail to report their availability for new assignments have voluntarily quit or been discharged due to reduction in force for unemployment compensation purposes.
Background and Facts
SOS Staffing operated a temporary employment service requiring workers to report their availability for new assignments after completing each job. Employees Gray and Lowrey completed their respective assignments and moved to Nevada without contacting SOS about future work. Both filed for unemployment benefits, which the Department of Workforce Services granted. The Administrative Law Judge and Workforce Appeals Board determined the employees were discharged due to reduction in force, making SOS liable for benefit costs.
Key Legal Issues
The primary issue was whether employees who fail to report availability for new assignments with a temporary staffing agency have voluntarily quit or been discharged. Under Utah Code § 35A-4-405(1)(a), claimants are ineligible for benefits if they “left work voluntarily without good cause.”
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court applied moderate deference to the agency’s decision under the sliding scale approach. The court emphasized that voluntariness depends on the employee’s willingness to continue working, not the employer’s desire. Because the employees had control over whether their employment continued and chose not to report availability, they voluntarily severed the employment relationship. The court rejected the Board’s theory that assignments with different clients constituted separate employments, clarifying that SOS—not its clients—employed the workers in an ongoing relationship.
Practice Implications
This decision establishes that temporary employees maintain control over their employment continuation through availability reporting. Employers should document clear policies requiring employee contact for new assignments. The ruling preserves the possibility that employees who quit for good cause or where denial would be “contrary to equity and good conscience” may still receive benefits, but places the burden on employees to pursue such theories.
Case Details
Case Name
SOS Staffing Services v. Department of Workforce Services
Citation
1999 UT App 210
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 981318-CA
Date Decided
June 24, 1999
Outcome
Reversed
Holding
Temporary employees who fail to report their availability for new assignments voluntarily quit their employment rather than being discharged due to a reduction in force.
Standard of Review
Moderate deference for agency’s application of law to fact under the sliding scale approach
Practice Tip
When challenging unemployment benefit determinations, focus on the employee’s control over the continuation of the employment relationship rather than the employer’s desire to continue or terminate employment.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.