IN THE MATTER OF CIRLINCIONE

Claimant was discharged from her employment as an admissions supervisor for a drug treatment program after she used profane language when speaking to a client. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she engaged in misconduct. It is well settled that an employee's use of offensive language can constitute disqualifying misconduct ( see Matter of Romano [Commissioner of Labor], 291 A.D.2d 776; Matter of Sanderson [Commissioner of Labor], 275 A.D.2d 844), particularly in a case such as this where claimant had been warned the same day about the inappropriate manner in which she spoke to clients. Moreover, the record establishes that claimant was aware that violating the employer's policy against the use of obscene or abusive language could be grounds for immediate dismissal ( see Matter of Campbell [Commissioner of Labor], 271 A.D.2d 787). Claimant's denial that she used profanity or that she had ever been warned about unacceptable conduct presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve ( see Matter of Roker [Commissioner of Labor], 306 A.D.2d 737; Matter of Cooper [New York Apple Tours — Commissioner of Labor], 276 A.D.2d 1007). Claimant's remaining contention with respect to hearsay evidence has been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.