In Buckman v. D.C. Dept. of Employment Services, the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed a denial of unemployment benefits to a salaried accountant who resigned after her employer reassigned her to a significantly lower role following maternity leave.
Michelle Buckman, a senior accountant earning $16,000 annually, went on extended maternity leave due to a high-risk pregnancy. Upon her return, her employer informed her she would no longer resume her professional role but instead be placed in an entry-level accounting clerk position—without a salary cut. Buckman viewed this as a demotion with no advancement potential and chose to resign.
The Department of Employment Services initially disqualified her, concluding she left voluntarily without good cause. However, during the appeal process, the Office of Appeals and Review (OAR) improperly considered new post-hearing evidence submitted by the employer and Buckman—materials that were not part of the original hearing record.
The court held that OAR violated administrative procedure by basing its final decision on information outside the official record. It emphasized that unemployment appeals must rely solely on the evidence presented before the appeals examiner, citing Bowen and relevant provisions of D.C. law.
The court reversed the Department’s decision and remanded the case for a de novo hearing.
Lessons learned from the case:
- Salaried employees are entitled to procedural fairness in benefit disputes.
- Downgrading a returning employee’s role—regardless of salary—can trigger legitimate claims.
- Employees may still qualify for unemployment benefits even if they resign—if the resignation is connected to substantial changes in the job.
If you want to know more about salaried employee rights, read our guide on What are my rights as a salaried employee in the District of Columbia?
