A court of appeals ruled that a guard who refused to take required training classes engaged in misconduct that disqualified him from receiving unemployment benefits.
FACTSScott Foster was an employee of Vance Uniformed Protective Services, where he worked as a security officer and site supervisor. Foster's employment contract with his employer required him to complete training classes in handcuffing and chemical agents. Foster was also required to oversee other officers. One of Foster's duties was to ensure that each officer initialed his schedule.
When Foster failed to take the training classes and to ensure the officers initialed their schedules, the security company terminated Foster. Foster sought unemployment benefits, which the state employment department initially granted. The security company appealed, and the employment department denied benefits based on Foster's misconduct. Foster appealed.
DECISIONThe court of appeals stated that an employee is not entitled to unemployment benefits when the employee is terminated for misconduct. Failure to follow an employer's reasonable policies is misconduct.
The court ruled that Foster was not entitled to unemployment benefits because his refusal to complete training courses in handcuffing and chemical agents constituted misconduct.
The court affirmed the denial of benefits based on such misconduct.
IMPLICATIONSA security company's requirement that its guards complete certain training courses is a reasonable request. A security guard's failure to follow the company's policy by refusing to complete the appropriate training is misconduct. If the security guard is terminated for such misconduct and seeks unemployment benefits, the guard is not entitled to the benefits.
Source: Security Law Newsletter, 06/01/2006
Copyright © 2006 by Strafford Publications, Inc. http://www.straffordpub.com/ All rights reserved. Storage, reproduction or transmission by any means is prohibited except pursuant to a valid license agreement.
