| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
insubordination |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed after her involvement in a fight with a co-worker, this being the second incident involving the two. The claimant and her co-worker had been warned and knew that the employer had a zero tolerance policy for this type of incident. The co-worker was also dismissed as a result of these incidents. The Commission concluded that the claimant' s engagement in a physical altercation with her co-worker on company property after a first reprimand for the same reasons constituted a breach of the employer' s zero tolerance policy forming part of the employment contract and resulted in a misconduct justifying the dismissal. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
breaches of company policy |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed after her involvement in a fight with a co-worker, this being the second incident involving the two. The claimant and her co-worker had been warned and knew that the employer had a zero tolerance policy for this type of incident. The co-worker was also dismissed as a result of these incidents. The Commission concluded that the claimant' s engagement in a physical altercation with her co-worker on company property after a first reprimand for the same reasons constituted a breach of the employer' s zero tolerance policy forming part of the employment contract and resulted in a misconduct justifying the dismissal. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
unacceptable behavior |
acts of violence |
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed after her involvement in a fight with a co-worker, this being the second incident involving the two. The claimant and her co-worker had been warned and knew that the employer had a zero tolerance policy for this type of incident. The co-worker was also dismissed as a result of these incidents. The Commission concluded that the claimant' s engagement in a physical altercation with her co-worker on company property after a first reprimand for the same reasons constituted a breach of the employer' s zero tolerance policy forming part of the employment contract and resulted in a misconduct justifying the dismissal. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
misconduct |
violations of contract |
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed after her involvement in a fight with a co-worker, this being the second incident involving the two. The claimant and her co-worker had been warned and knew that the employer had a zero tolerance policy for this type of incident. The co-worker was also dismissed as a result of these incidents. The Commission concluded that the claimant' s engagement in a physical altercation with her co-worker on company property after a first reprimand for the same reasons constituted a breach of the employer' s zero tolerance policy forming part of the employment contract and resulted in a misconduct justifying the dismissal. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed.
