An employee of a financial information services company located in New York performed her work by “telecommuting” from Florida. The employee had a home office in her residence, was provided with a second telephone line and computer equipment by her employer, and was given access to the company’s mainframe computer located in New York. The employee was required to be available during normal business hours, and she maintained daily contact with her Chapter 19: Downsizing and Post-Termination Issues 663 supervisor in New York. At some point, the employer decided to end the telecommuting arrangement. The employee was offered employment at the New York office, which she declined. She initially filed for unemployment insurance in Florida. The employer contested this claim on the grounds that she had voluntarily left her job. Subsequently, she was informed that she might be eligible for unemployment insurance (with higher weekly payments) in New York. Her claim for benefits in New York was again contested by the employer, this time on the grounds that she had not been employed in New York. What should the court decide regarding her eligibility for unemployment benefits and from which state any benefits should come? Why? (Allen v. Commissioner of Labor, 794 N.E. 2d 1