|
Unemployment Insurance
Web Library Topic -
Failing to Follow the Employer's Rules or Instructions
Instructed
to Perform an Illegal Act
Refusing to
Work Overtime
Insubordination or Disobedience of a Reasonable Instruction
Violation of
a Statute or Company Rule
Refusal to
Work A Different Shift
Refusal to
Transfer to Another Department
Instructed to Perform An
Illegal Act
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(4)(l), C.R.S.
2005
(4) An individual separated from a job shall be given a
full award of benefits if any of the following reasons and pertinent
conditions related thereto are determined by the division to have
existed. The determination of whether or not the separation from
employment shall result in a full award of benefits shall be the
responsibility of the division. The following reasons shall be
considered, along with any other factors that may be pertinent to such
determination:
(l) Being instructed or requested to perform a service or commit an
act which is in violation of an ordinance or statute.
Cases
The ICAO is unaware of any published Colorado court
cases that specifically
address this statute.
Refusing to Work Overtime
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(4)(k), C.R.S.
2005
(4) An individual separated from a job shall be given a
full award of benefits if any of the following reasons and pertinent
conditions related thereto are determined by the division to have
existed. The determination of whether or not the separation from
employment shall result in a full award of benefits shall be the
responsibility of the division. The following reasons shall be
considered, along with any other factors that may be pertinent to such
determination:
(k) Refusing with good cause to work overtime without reasonable
advance notice. Good cause as used in this paragraph (k) shall be
restricted to reasonable, compelling personal reasons as determined by
the division affecting either the worker or the worker's immediate
family.
Case
Action Key
Punch Service, Inc. v. Industrial Commission, 709 P.2d 970 (Colo.
App. 1985)
In order to warrant award of unemployment benefits where claimant
refuses to work overtime, circumstances must be so compelling that
claimant was deprived of making volitional choice in refusing.
Here, a previously planned birthday party was not a compelling
personal reason under § 8-73-108(4)(k) for justifying refusal to
work overtime.
Insubordination or
Disobedience of a Reasonable Instruction
Also includes:
- Failure to obtain, maintain,
or renew required licenses or certifications
- Failure to keep in good standing
with the union
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(5)(e)(VI), C.R.S.
2005
(5)(e) Subject to the maximum reduction consistent with federal law,
and insofar as consistent with interstate agreements, if a separation
from employment occurs for any of the following reasons, the employer
from whom such separation occurred shall not be charged for benefits
which are attributable to such employment and, because any payment of
benefits which are attributable to such employment out of the fund as
defined in section 8-70-103 (13) shall be deemed to have an adverse
effect on such employer's account in such fund, no payment of such
benefits shall be made from such fund:
(VI) Insubordination such as: Deliberate disobedience of a reasonable
instruction of an employer or an employer's duly authorized
representative, refusal or failure to obtain, maintain, or renew
licenses, certifications, credentials, conditions, or other professional
designations which are necessary to permit the claimant to perform a
job, failure to keep in good standing with the union because of
nonpayment of dues, or repeated acts of agitation against employer
working conditions, pay scale, policies, or procedures; except that
orderly action on the part of an employee or through union negotiation
shall not be so considered if such action does not interfere with work
performance.
Cases
Sayers v. American Janitorial Service, 162
Colo. 292, 425 P.2d 693 (1967)
Willful misconduct or deliberate disobedience does not necessarily require
actual intent to wrong the employer; it is enough if there is a
conscious indifference to the perpetration of a wrong or a reckless
disregard of the claimant's duty to his or her employer.
Rose Medical Center Hospital Association v. Industrial Claim Appeals
Office, 757 P.2d 1173 (Colo. App. 1988)
Insubordination, such as deliberate disobedience of
a reasonable instruction, is to be reviewed using an objective
standard; i.e. whether a reasonable person in the claimant's
position would have refused to obey the instruction.
Violation of a Statute or
Company Rule
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(5)(e)(VII), C.R.S.
2005
(5)(e) Subject to the maximum reduction consistent with federal law,
and insofar as consistent with interstate agreements, if a separation
from employment occurs for any of the following reasons, the employer
from whom such separation occurred shall not be charged for benefits
which are attributable to such employment and, because any payment of
benefits which are attributable to such employment out of the fund as
defined in section 8-70-103 (13) shall be deemed to have an adverse
effect on such employer's account in such fund, no payment of such
benefits shall be made from such fund:
(VII) Violation of a statute or of a company rule which resulted or
could have resulted in serious damage to the employer's property or
interests or could have endangered the life of the worker or other
persons, such as: Mistreatment of patients in a hospital or nursing
home; serving liquor to minors; selling prescription items without
prescriptions from licensed doctors; immoral conduct which has an effect
on worker's job status; divulging of confidential information which
resulted or could have resulted in damage to the employer's interests;
failure to observe conspicuously posted safety rules; intentional
falsification of expense accounts, inventories, or other records or
reports whether or not substantial harm or injury was incurred; or
removal or attempted removal of employer's property from the premises of
the employer without proper authority.
Cases
Madrid v.
Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., 728 P.2d 1299 (Colo.
App. 1986)
Even though exact costs of damage to employer could
not be determined, the claimant's unauthorized use of equipment in
violation of employer's policy was prejudicial to the employer's
interests as a public utility, and serious damage could have
resulted to the employer's interests.
Nielsen v.
AMI Industries, Inc., 759 P.2d 834 (Colo. App. 1988)
The claimant did not act volitionally to cause his
separation when he acted contrary to the employer's unwritten
policy, because the policy had never been communicated to him.
Refusal to Work A
Different Shift
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(5)(e)(XVIII), C.R.S.
2005
(5)(e) Subject to the maximum reduction consistent with federal law,
and insofar as consistent with interstate agreements, if a separation
from employment occurs for any of the following reasons, the employer
from whom such separation occurred shall not be charged for benefits
which are attributable to such employment and, because any payment of
benefits which are attributable to such employment out of the fund as
defined in section 8-70-103 (13) shall be deemed to have an adverse
effect on such employer's account in such fund, no payment of such
benefits shall be made from such fund:
(XVIII) Refusal without good cause to work a different shift when no
violation of seniority rights, as provided in
paragraph (d) of
subsection (4) of this section, is involved.
Cases
The ICAO is unaware of any published Colorado court
cases that specifically
address this statute.
Refusal to Transfer to
Another Department
Statute
§ 8‑73‑108(5)(e)(XIX), C.R.S.
2005
(5)(e) Subject to the maximum reduction consistent with federal law,
and insofar as consistent with interstate agreements, if a separation
from employment occurs for any of the following reasons, the employer
from whom such separation occurred shall not be charged for benefits
which are attributable to such employment and, because any payment of
benefits which are attributable to such employment out of the fund as
defined in section 8-70-103 (13) shall be deemed to have an adverse
effect on such employer's account in such fund, no payment of such
benefits shall be made from such fund:
(XIX) Refusal without good cause to accept transfer to another
department which does not involve a substantial change in working
conditions or a substantial loss in wages.
Case
Wargon v.
Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 787 P.2d 668 (Colo. App. 1990)
Determination of whether any change in the working
conditions was substantially less favorable, or there was "good
cause" for refusing the transfer, must be made using an objective
standard, and is not based on the claimant’s subjective view or
preferences.
Back to Top |
Library Index | ICAO
Home Page |
CDLE
Home Page
|
