Decision 26219
| Case Number | Claimant | Judge | Language | Decision date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decision 26219 | Bourgeois | English | 1994-12-02 |
| Decision | Appealed | Appellant | Corresponding Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dismissed | No | N/A | - |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue 1: | Sub-Issue 2: | Sub-Issue 3: |
|---|---|---|---|
| misconduct | refusal to work overtime |
Summary:
There was sufficient proof of misconduct to warrant the conclusion arrived at by the Board: the refusal of the claimant to work overtime after she had clearly undertaken to do so constitutes misconduct within the meaning of the UI Act and jurisprudence.