19-AT-02752-BR – The employer argued that since the claimant knew he had been hired for a temporary position, he was “at fault” for his termination. However, Section 2-404.2 states that if an employer hires someone for a limited period of time specified by the employer, the worker is considered laid off due to lack of work at the end of that time period. Therefore, the claimant is considered discharged but not for misconduct connected to the work.
17-AT-13142-BR - Claimant worked for over a year with weight restrictions of lifting no more than 10 pounds, but was told he would not be put back on the schedule unless he provided the employer a full medical release without restrictions. Because the claimant had worked for over a year with the restrictions and the employer refused to allow him to work under those same conditions, the claimant was discharged but not for misconduct.
17-AT-12231-BR - The employer did not have a position for the claimant under his light-duty restrictions, after he had sustained an injury and missed several months of work. Despite the employer placing the claimant on leave and paying his insurance premiums, he is deemed unemployed as he is not performing work for the employer. Because the claimant is willing to work but the employer does not have that type of work available, the claimant was discharged but not for misconduct.
16-AT-05951-BR Claimant left meeting early without permission; not misconduct.
15-AT-11030-BR - Claimant discharged when Employer did not allow her to return to work.
15-AT-03602-BR - 406(B) limits misconduct to eight specific acts; Claimant's actions do not meet any of those.