There was one decision on unemployment benefits issued this week by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. The decision highlights the rule that intentionally disobeying an established company policy is employment misconduct -- a violation of the standards of behavior that an employer has the right to reasonably expect -- makes an applicant ineligible for unemployment benefits.
A14-1075, Michael McCalister, Relator, vs. The Fresh Group Ltd. - Maglio & Company, Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent.
Relator Michael McCalister challenges the denial of his claim for unemployment benefits, arguing that the unemployment-law judge erred in determining that he was discharged for employment misconduct. The misconduct in this case was using a cell phone on the production floor after repeatedly being warned that such behavior violated company policy. Because sufficient evidence exists to support the decision, we affirm.
If you are denied unemployment benefits, or are an employer who wants to challenge a former employee's eligibility for benefits, your best bet is to meet with an attorney who handles unemployment appeals to discuss your options. To that end, I represent both applicants and employers in unemployment appeals. Please call (763) 450-9494 today to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation. Reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C. Also, Tim is licensed only in state and federal courts in Minnesota. As such, any information provided in this blog post pertains only to those jurisdictions. Further, you should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog. To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
A14-1075, Michael McCalister, Relator, vs. The Fresh Group Ltd. - Maglio & Company, Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent.
Relator Michael McCalister challenges the denial of his claim for unemployment benefits, arguing that the unemployment-law judge erred in determining that he was discharged for employment misconduct. The misconduct in this case was using a cell phone on the production floor after repeatedly being warned that such behavior violated company policy. Because sufficient evidence exists to support the decision, we affirm.
If you are denied unemployment benefits, or are an employer who wants to challenge a former employee's eligibility for benefits, your best bet is to meet with an attorney who handles unemployment appeals to discuss your options. To that end, I represent both applicants and employers in unemployment appeals. Please call (763) 450-9494 today to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation. Reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C. Also, Tim is licensed only in state and federal courts in Minnesota. As such, any information provided in this blog post pertains only to those jurisdictions. Further, you should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog. To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
RSS Feed