| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
dishonesty |
|
|
Summary:
Claimant dismissed for eating company product which was considered to be theft by the employer. Claimant is of the view that the infraction is minor, that his dismissal was excessive punishment and that the employer had not follow the employee handbook. Appeal denied by BOR and Umpire. Misconduct is a question of law and severity of the result of such a finding is not the proper question to be addressed by either a BOR or an Umpire.
