The opinion in Appeal Board No. 555846 was as follows:
"OPINION: The credible evidence establishes that the claimant was discharged on April 29, 2010, because the employer believed she had violated its policy on confidential information. I find that the terms of the "annual" statement of compliance that the claimant had signed almost two years before her discharge were too vague to have placed her on adequate or reasonable notice that her conduct in discussing her subordinate's work-related issues with his wife, who was also an employee, was either prohibited by the policy or would lead to her discharge. Although the claimant may have performed poorly, and exercised poor judgment, in her capacity as a supervisor, this does not rise to the level of misconduct for unemployment insurance purposes. Accordingly, I conclude that the claimant was not separated under disqualifying circumstances, although an employer may discharge an employee for any lawful reason. As the claimant was not disqualified, she was entitled to receive benefits and was not overpaid. Regarding the allegation of wilful misrepresentation to obtain benefits, the record does not reflect the choices the claimant was presented as to the reason of separation at the time she filed her claim. Accordingly, I am unable to conclude that the claimant made a knowing, intentional, or deliberate false statement to obtain benefits in
selecting inability to meet performance or production standards. Moreover, even crediting the employer's contention that the claimant was told she was discharged for breach of confidentiality and inappropriate communications, her choice would not have been unreasonable under the circumstances, considering that that the claimant had at some point been counseled about poor performance for inappropriate communications."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.