| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
criminal acts |
|
|
Summary:
There is no doubt that the employer acted on reasonable grounds in suspending claimant. That does not however equate to misconduct on the part of the employee. An employer can dismiss an employee for all sorts of reasonable grounds but that does not mean misconduct.
Not sufficient evidence to support misconduct. Claimant was charged with sexual assault. He was acquitted largely because the complainant was not believed. Neither the Board nor the Umpire has had any direct evidence from that individual or other witnesses called at the trial.
Neither the employer nor co-employees had any direct knowledge of what gave rise to a charge of sexual assault. To find misconduct here would be to find that it was misconduct to be charged with an offence. That surely cannot be. Individuals are presumed innocent until convicted.
