| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
improper language |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed he had been abusive towards his manager. He had two previous incidents of being verbally abusive and/or aggressive for which he had received warnings. The employer provided copies of the warnings. The claimant says he had asked questions and he did not agree that this constitutes aggressive behaviour of misconduct. He suggested that the employer was guilty of trying to muzzle employees who ask questions pertaining to working conditions. The Board noted that the claimant had acknowledged being aware of the employer's Violence in the Workplace Policy and that he had signed the warnings he had received. The Board concluded that the claimant's repeated aggressiveness at his workplace, even after receiving warnings, constituted misconduct. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed by the Umpire.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
insubordination |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed he had been abusive towards his manager. He had two previous incidents of being verbally abusive and/or aggressive for which he had received warnings. The employer provided copies of the warnings. The claimant says he had asked questions and he did not agree that this constitutes aggressive behaviour of misconduct. He suggested that the employer was guilty of trying to muzzle employees who ask questions pertaining to working conditions. The Board noted that the claimant had acknowledged being aware of the employer's Violence in the Workplace Policy and that he had signed the warnings he had received. The Board concluded that the claimant's repeated aggressiveness at his workplace, even after receiving warnings, constituted misconduct. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed by the Umpire.
