| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
acts of violence |
|
|
Summary:
Fired because claimant allegedly attacked a co-worker with a steel pipe after an argument. Claimant clearly breached his duty in this case by acting contrary to company policy which prohibited violence at the work place. The prohibited behaviour was the reason for the dismissal and the employer didn't use this incident as an excuse for dismissal. Claimant's conduct constituted misconduct.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
breach of rules |
|
|
Summary:
Fired because claimant allegedly attacked a co-worker with a steel pipe after an argument. Claimant clearly breached his duty in this case by acting contrary to company policy which prohibited violence at the work place. The prohibited behaviour was the reason for the dismissal and the employer didn't use this incident as an excuse for dismissal. Claimant's conduct constituted misconduct.
