| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
breaches of company policy |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant had been employed with a manufacturing company. The reason the claimant was dismissed was that he had received several warnings and had been given suspensions with respect to breaches of company policy. The last incident took place in September of 2007 when the claimant did not lock down a machine prior to repairing it. The claimant agrees that he did not lock it down but he did unplug the machine. The claimant in his notice of appeal stated: «I felt that since I had shut off the power that was okay. I forgot lock-out procedure». In May, a three day suspension for lockout violation, and then in August a termination for lockout violation. The appeal of the claimant dismissed.
