| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
unexcused absences from work |
|
|
Summary:
Following a warning against unauthorized absences, the claimant failed to attend work between December 12 and 21, 2009, because he was outside of the country. The claimant was notified of his dismissal upon his return to work on December 21. The Commission denied benefits because the claimant lost his employment as a result of his misconduct. The FCA found that the Umpire did not fail to intervene in the Board’s conclusion that the daughter’s trip was not an emergency. The FCA further held that the Umpire did not err by failing to intervene in the Board’s finding that the absence without notification may be blameless but just cause argument is not relevant when wilful misconduct engaged disregarding employer's policy. Finally, regarding the Applicant’s argument that he was not terminated for just cause, the Court held that arguments with respect to just cause are irrelevant to determining if wilful misconduct took place.
