STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)


ISRAEL V LUIS, Employe

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 99601355RC


An administrative law judge (ALJ) for the Division of Unemployment Insurance of the Department of Workforce Development issued a decision in this matter. A timely petition for review was filed.

The commission has considered the petition and the positions of the parties, and it has reviewed the evidence submitted to the ALJ. Based on its review, the commission agrees with the decision of the ALJ, and it adopts the findings and conclusion in that decision as its own.

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is affirmed. Accordingly, the employe is ineligible for benefits beginning in week 4 of 1999, and until seven weeks have elapsed since the end of the week of discharge and the employe has earned wages in covered employment performed after the week of discharge equaling at least 14 times the employe's weekly benefit rate which would have been paid had the discharge not occurred.

Dated and mailed September 3, 1999
luisis.usd : 132 : 6  MC 652.5  MC 653.1

David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ Pamela I. Anderson, Commissioner

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner


MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employe has petitioned for commission review of the adverse appeal tribunal decision which found that he was discharged from his employment and for misconduct connected with his work. The employe argues in its petition that because the employe's witnesses could not agree on the acceptable BAC level, that showed that he did not know the appropriate level and therefore could not have engaged in misconduct. The commission disagrees. The employer's policy prohibits the employe from reporting for work under the influence of alcohol. This need not be measured solely by a blood alcohol level. The employer provided firsthand evidence that the employe was hostile, acting slow, sweating, and had bloodshot eyes. The employe's appearance and his conduct showed that he was under the influence. Given the fact that the employe's position involved operating a motorized vehicle, it was highly improper for the employe to appear for work in such a state. For these reasons, the commission agrees with the administrative law judge that the employe's actions in reporting for work under the influence of alcohol constituted an intentional and wilful and substantial disregard for standards of behavior the employer had a right to expect of the employe.

cc: ATTORNEY ROBERT E HANEY
PODELL UGENT HANEY & DELERY SC

ROBERT C TIBBITS
CONTINENTAL INVESTIGATIONS & SEC


[ Search UC Decisions ] - [ UC Digest - Main Index ] - [ UC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]