Reseña de District Columbia v. M.M.

District Columbia v. M.M. de District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Resumen del Libro

Petitioner, Freddie Giles, appeals a decision by the Office of Appeals and Review (OAR) which affirmed his disqualification for unemployment compensation benefits because his termination was due to "gross misconduct." See D.C. Code § 46-111 (b) (1996). Giles was employed as a plumber by American University from January 1, 1993, until May 12, 1995, at which time he was terminated for poor work performance and failure to obey direct supervisory orders. Giles filed a claim for unemployment benefits on May 10, 1995. He was disqualified from benefits by the Claims Examiner due to "gross misconduct." After an appeal hearing, during which Giles and witnesses for American University gave testimony and presented documentary evidence, the Appeals Examiner affirmed the original gross misconduct disqualification. The OAR also affirmed the gross misconduct disqualification. Giles appeals the disqualification decision to this court. We vacate and remand for further consideration as to whether petitioners "poor work performance" constituted "gross misconduct" disqualifying him from unemployment compensation benefits under the statute.

👋 ¿Te encanta el libro District Columbia v. M.M.? ¿Podría compartir por favor?

District Columbia v. M.M. (District of Columbia Court of Appeals.) Análisis y Personajes

Comentario de District Columbia v. M.M., libro de District of Columbia Court of Appeals.

¿Ya leíste este libro? ¿Qué opinas del libro District Columbia v. M.M. de District of Columbia Court of Appeals.? ¡Haga una pregunta a la comunidad de bookpedia.co sobre District Columbia v. M.M.!