| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
harassment |
|
|
Summary:
Claimant suspended following a charge of sexual assault. Only evidence in the record: employer's vague and speculative version of the facts. BOR asked the Commission to investigate further but the Commission refused. Disqualification upheld by the BOR and by the Umpire, who was satisfied with the body of evidence. FCA disagreed: to show misconduct and the link between misconduct and employment, not enough to raise the filing of criminal charges not yet proven at the time of separation from employment and to rely solely on the employer's speculations, with no further verification. References to Joseph (A-636-85), Langlois (A-94-95), Choinière (A-471-95) and Fakhari (A-732-95).
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
natural justice and error in law or in fact |
|
Summary:
Citing Joseph (A-636-85), Langlois (A-94-95), Choinière (A-471-95) and Fakhari (A-732-95), FCA ruled that to show misconduct and the link between misconduct and employment, it is not enough to raise the filing of criminal charges not yet proven at the time of separation from employment and to rely solely on the employer's speculations, with no further verification. Commission and, subsequently, the BOR and the Umpire cannot be allowed to be satisfied with an unverified, one-sided version of the facts from the employer regarding acts that, at the time the employer's decision was made, were merely unproven allegations. Commission can discharge its burden of proof more easily if the employer 's decision is made after the preliminary inquiry and, even more so, if it is made after the trial.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
misconduct |
criminal acts |
|
Summary:
Claimant suspended following a charge of sexual assault. Only evidence in the record: employer's vague and speculative version of the facts. BOR asked the Commission to investigate further but the Commission refused. Disqualification upheld by the BOR and by the Umpire, who was satisfied with the body of evidence. FCA disagreed: to show misconduct and the link between misconduct and employment, not enough to raise the filing of criminal charges not yet proven at the time of separation from employment and to rely solely on the employer's speculations, with no further verification. References to Joseph (A-636-85), Langlois (A-94-95), Choinière (A-471-95) and Fakhari (A-732-95).
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
misconduct |
proof |
|
Summary:
Claimant suspended following a charge of sexual assault. Only evidence in the record: employer's vague and speculative version of the facts. BOR asked the Commission to investigate further but the Commission refused. Disqualification upheld by the BOR and by the Umpire, who was satisfied with the body of evidence. FCA disagreed: to show misconduct and the link between misconduct and employment, not enough to raise the filing of criminal charges not yet proven at the time of separation from employment and to rely solely on the employer's speculations, with no further verification. References to Joseph (A-636-85), Langlois (A-94-95), Choinière (A-471-95) and Fakhari (A-732-95).
