Where an employee knowingly violated a company rule prohibiting employees from taking cell phones into the work area, her termination for the violation disqualified her from receiving temporary total disability benefits for an earlier, work-related injury since her actions amounted to a voluntary abandonment of her employment, held an Ohio appellate court recently. Acknowledging that in order for a written work rule to be not unreasonably applied, the employer must not only clearly define the prohibited conduct, it must also have previously identified the violation as a dischargeable offense. The court observed that here, however, the employee had been given three prior written warnings for cell phone violations. The last warning resulted in a three-day suspension and the suspension notice further indicated that a further violation could be grounds for termination. The court denied the requested writ of mandamus.
Reported by Thomas A. Robinson, J.D.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See State ex rel. Haywood v. Industrial Comm’n, 2013 Ohio 2658, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 2637 (June 25, 2013) [2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 2637 (June 25, 2013)].
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 84.04 [84.04].
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.