| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
breach of rules |
smoking prohibited |
|
Summary:
Clmt was caught smoking despite an established company non-smoking policy and previous warning. Clmt’s justification that the policy was never enforced does not excuse his conduct. He erred when he failed to heed the warning and risked termination of his employment if he violated his commitment to remain a non-smoker.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
justification |
others misconduct themselves |
|
Summary:
Clmt was caught smoking despite an established company non-smoking policy and previous warning. Clmt’s justification for disregarding company policy because other employees have not been investigated and dismissed for smoking will not excuse his conduct . He erred when he failed to heed the warning and risked termination of his employment if he violated his commitment to remain a non-smoker.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
misconduct |
definition |
|
Summary:
Clmt’s disregard for company non-smoking policy despite the condition of his employment and the warning he received manifested a mental element of wilfulness on his part. Conduct which impacts upon the relationship between employer and employee constitutes misconduct and the claimant's breach of his undertaking adversely affected that relationship.
