A. "Misconduct connected with the employment" means any act or omission by an employee which constitutes a material or substantial breach of the employee's duties or obligations pursuant to the employment or contract of employment or which adversely affects a material or substantial interest of the employer.
B. "Wilful or negligent misconduct connected with the employment" includes, but under no circumstances is limited to, the following:
1. Absence from work without either notice to the employer or good cause for failing to give notice, repeated absence from work without good cause where warnings regarding repeated absence have been received from the employer, frequent absences from work without good cause, failure to return to work following an authorized leave, vacation, sick leave or other leave of absence when such failure is without permission from the employer, or repeated failure without good cause to exercise due care for punctuality or attendance in regard to the scheduled hours of work set by the employer.
2. Repeated intoxication, whether from the use of intoxicating liquor or the use of illegal drugs, on the employer's premises or when reporting to work, frequent absences caused by intoxication or the aftereffects of intoxication, or sleeping on the employer's premises during scheduled work hours or inefficiency or inability to perform the employment, due to intoxication or the aftereffects of intoxication.
3. Failure to pass, or the refusal to take, a drug test or alcohol impairment test administered by, or at the request of, the employer pursuant to title 23, chapter 2, article 14.
4. Refusal or knowing failure to perform reasonable and proper duties assigned by the employer.
5. Insubordination, disobedience, repeated and inappropriate use of abusive language, assault on another employee or repeated fighting, refusal to accept an assignment to work at certain times or to perform certain duties without good cause, refusal to follow reasonable and proper instructions given by the employer, or intentional or negligent destruction of the employer's property.
6. Dishonesty, material falsification of employment applications or of other written documents relating to obtaining or retaining employment, falsification of time records or work records, theft or conversion of property of the employer, or untruthfulness related to the job which could substantially injure or jeopardize the employer's interest.
7. Admission of or conviction for any felony or crime related to the employer's business or to the employment or which could have a substantial adverse effect on the employer's interest, public relations or trust, unless the employer had actual knowledge of such admission or conviction at the commencement of the employment.
8. Violation without good cause of any rule of conduct, safety rule or other rule in any way related to the employment which is reasonably imposed and communicated by the employer or which can be reasonably implied from the type of employment.
9. Violence or unlawful conduct committed during a labor dispute, strike or lockout or during picketing activities on, proximate to or directed at the employer's premises, property or operations.
C. Upon notification from an interested party, if a claimant has been subsequently convicted or acquitted of a felony with respect to the act for which he was separated, his claim shall be reconsidered after a tribunal hearing based on the newly available evidence.
D. In evaluating misconduct, a claimant's prior history of employment with the same employer shall be considered.
Notes of Decisions
Weller v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 860 P.2d 487 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 14× “A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B)(2). However, a positive test result revealing that marijuana of unknown quantity inhaled or ingested at an unknown prior time may reflect only off-duty activity and may be entirely unrelated to work.”
Golden Eagle Distributors, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 885 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 5× “section 23-619.01 (Supp.1993); Weller . Arizona Unemployment Insurance Benefits Analysis The Appellees argue that before the Claimant can be disqualified from benefits, the Appellant must prove that the positive drug test was “connected with the work.”
Prebula v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 672 P.2d 978 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “(Emphasis added) Wilful or negligent misconduct is described in A.R.S. § 23-619.01 which in pertinent part provides: B.”
Castaneda v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 815 P.2d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “A proper application of this statute requires consideration of A.R.S. § 23-619.01, in which the Legislature defined “misconduct connected with the employment.”
State v. Heinze, 993 P.2d 1090 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B) (1995) (defining as " 'wilful or negligent misconduct connected with the employment’ ” the "admission of or conviction for any felony or crime related to the employer’s business or to the employment”) (emphasis added); A.”
Nunn v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 624 P.2d 318 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 6× “A.R.S. § 23-619.01 A states: A. “Misconduct connected with the employment” means any act or omission by an employee which constitutes a material or substantial breach of the employee’s duties or obligations pursuant to the employment or contract of employment or which adversely…”
Jd Med. v. ades/roach (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B)(1); Gardiner v. Ariz.”
Nieves v. opulent/ades (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “The Board affirmed the Tribunal’s determination that Nieves was discharged for “misconduct connected with the employment” under A.R.S. §§ 23-619.01 and -775, and A.A.C. R6-3- 51390.”
Reily v. ades/paychex (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 4× “¶21 A.R.S. 23-619.01 defines “[m]isconduct connected with the employment” as “any act or omission by an employee which constitutes a material or substantial breach of the employee’s duties or obligations pursuant to the employment or contract of employment or which adversely…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(A) — 3 cases
Golden Eagle Distributors, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 885 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
“section 23-619.01 (Supp.1993); Weller . Arizona Unemployment Insurance Benefits Analysis The Appellees argue that before the Claimant can be disqualified from benefits, the Appellant must prove that the positive drug test was “connected with the work.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B) — 3 cases
State v. Heinze, 993 P.2d 1090 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“See A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B) (1995) (defining as " 'wilful or negligent misconduct connected with the employment’ ” the "admission of or conviction for any felony or crime related to the employer’s business or to the employment”) (emphasis added); A.”
Golden Eagle Distributors, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 885 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
“section 23-619.01 (Supp.1993); Weller . Arizona Unemployment Insurance Benefits Analysis The Appellees argue that before the Claimant can be disqualified from benefits, the Appellant must prove that the positive drug test was “connected with the work.”
Reily v. ades/paychex (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“¶21 A.R.S. 23-619.01 defines “[m]isconduct connected with the employment” as “any act or omission by an employee which constitutes a material or substantial breach of the employee’s duties or obligations pursuant to the employment or contract of employment or which adversely…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B)(1) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B)(2) — 1 case
Weller v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 860 P.2d 487 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
“A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B)(2). However, a positive test result revealing that marijuana of unknown quantity inhaled or ingested at an unknown prior time may reflect only off-duty activity and may be entirely unrelated to work.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B)(5) — 3 cases
Nieves v. opulent/ades (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“The Board affirmed the Tribunal’s determination that Nieves was discharged for “misconduct connected with the employment” under A.R.S. §§ 23-619.01 and -775, and A.A.C. R6-3- 51390.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B)(7) — 1 case
Weller v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 860 P.2d 487 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
“A.R.S. § 23-619.01(B)(2). However, a positive test result revealing that marijuana of unknown quantity inhaled or ingested at an unknown prior time may reflect only off-duty activity and may be entirely unrelated to work.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(B)(l) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-619.01(D) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.