Background
Pamela Hightower worked for Montrose Memorial Hospital as a medical records and health information technician. Before relocating to Wisconsin in early August 2025, Hightower’s direct supervisor and department director authorized her to work remotely from that state. She did so until August 22.
On August 22, the hospital’s chief human resources officer told Hightower that she could no longer work remotely from Wisconsin. The hospital said her employment would end unless she returned to Colorado. Hightower declined to return, and her employment ended. A Division of Unemployment Insurance deputy initially denied benefits, but a hearing officer awarded them under Colorado’s substantial-change-in-working-conditions provision. The Industrial Claim Appeals Office affirmed.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. Substantial evidence supported the hearing officer’s finding that the hospital authorized Hightower’s remote arrangement and then abruptly revoked it after she had relocated.
The court held that it could not reweigh the hearing officer’s credibility determinations, including the decision not to credit the hospital’s evidence that Hightower’s supervisors lacked authority to approve remote work from Wisconsin. The hospital’s general discretion under its remote-work policy did not foreclose a finding that revoking this approved arrangement substantially changed Hightower’s working conditions. The court also rejected the hospital’s argument that Hightower’s move made her responsible for the change.
Key Takeaways
- Revoking a pre-approved remote-work arrangement after an employee relocates can be a substantial, less favorable change in working conditions.
- Appellate review does not permit reweighing a hearing officer’s credibility findings when substantial evidence supports them.
- An employer’s general authority to alter remote-work arrangements is not dispositive under the unemployment-benefits statute.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that unemployment-benefits eligibility turns on the factfinder’s determination of the actual reason for separation. Employers that approve remote work and later withdraw that approval may face benefit liability when the withdrawal materially worsens an employee’s working conditions.