Although claimant knew that the proper procedure when he would be absent from work was to call in and inform his supervisor, the record supports the conclusion that claimant failed to do this for a number of days. To the extent that the testimony was conflicting, this created only a question of credibility which is within the exclusive province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board (see, Matter of Padilla [Roberts], 113 A.D.2d 997). It has been held that unreported absences from work constitute misconduct warranting the employee's disqualification from receiving unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Michelfelder [Ross], 80 A.D.2d 969; Matter of Rossano [Levine], 52 A.D.2d 1006). Finally, the Board properly found that the overpayments made to claimant are recoverable (see, Matter of Barber [Roberts], 121 A.D.2d 767, 769; Matter of Easy [Roberts], 112 A.D.2d 573).
Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., Crew III, and Harvey, JJ., concur.