O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 34-8-24 (2019)

Bona fide in the labor market

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this chapter, the term ‘‘bona fide in the labor market’’ means that any person claiming benefits under this chapter must be available for full-time employment, as that term is generally understood in the trade or work classification involved, without regard to prior work restrictions, provided that no individual who is otherwise eligible shall be deemed ineligible for benefits solely because the individual seeks, applies for, or accepts only part-time work, instead of full-time work, provided the individual claiming benefits worked part-time during a majority of the weeks of work in the base period and the individual is available for part-time work for at least 20 hours per week.

History

(Code 1981, § 34-8-24, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 139, § 1; Ga. L. 2009, p. 139, § 5/HB 581.)

Annotations

Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 2009, p. 139, § 1/HB 581, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: ‘‘This Act shall be

known and may be cited as the ‘Georgia Works Job Creation and Protection Act of 2009.’ ’’

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code Section 34-8-34, which was repealed by Ga. L. 1991, p. 139, § 1, effective January 1, 1992, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

Full-time students. - Claimant can be a full-time student and still be available for full-time continuous employment. Curry v. Tanner, 180 Ga. App. 21, 348 S.E.2d 465 (1986) (decided under former § 34-8-34).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Claimant with direct interest in labor dispute is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits until that claimant completely severs the relationship with the employer involved in the

dispute and reenters the labor market through an active, good faith attempt to obtain full-time, continuous employment. 1991 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 91-19.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2011–2011 · leading case: Robinson v. Thurmond, 711 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011).
Robinson v. Thurmond, 711 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “) OCGA § 34-8-24. Therefore, under OCGA § 34-8-24, Robinson’s refusal to accept full-time work after having worked only part-time during her employment could not be a basis on which she could be declared ineligible to receive unemployment benefits.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.