| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
proof |
|
|
Summary:
The test requires that the Commission prove the misconduct and that this must be proved with reasonable certainty. Where there is any reasonable doubt, this must be resolved in claimant's favour.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
definition |
|
|
Summary:
There must be a mental element such that the employee's action was wilful or at least of such a careless or negligent nature that one could say the employee wilfully disregarded the effects his or her action could have on job performance.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
absences from work |
|
|
Summary:
As expected, claimant notified employer of his illness within 3 days. What was expected thereafter and what claimant did is not clear. History of absences due to back problem. No phone at home due to recent move. Misconduct not proven.
