• This page, DC 200.9 Unreasonable Expectation, is   offered by
  • Board of Review

DC 200.9 Unreasonable Expectation

Click on the case numbers below to access decisions, where the Board considers whether the claimant’s discharge is due to an unreasonable employer expectation.

0079 1903 97

0079 1903 97 (Sept. 20, 2024) – Nineteen months after beginning her per diem employment as a nurse practitioner, the employer noticed that she had never signed an employment contract. At that point, the claimant was asked to sign one, but she refused because it contained a noncompete clause. As a result, the employer stopped providing her with work. Held this was a discharge from employment and the claimant was eligible for benefits pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2). Because the noncompete clause was presented to the claimant after she had been hired and without any consideration beyond her continued employment, it was in violation of G.L. c. 149, § 24L(b), and against public policy.

0024 6526 03

0024 6526 03 (Nov. 29, 2018) – Held claimant, who failed to comply with the employer’s reasonable expectation that she not report to her work area earlier than her start time, is disqualified under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2). She needed to comply even though she disagreed with it.

0023 4482 89

0023 4482 89 (Sept. 27, 2018) – Directive to submit to a Fitness for Duty examination based solely upon using an over-the-counter hemp based cream to relieve chronic knee pain was unreasonable, where the product did not contain THC, claimant’s job performance was unaffected, and her behavior was normal. Claimant’s discharge for refusing to take the exam was not disqualifying under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2).

0020 9459 20

0020 9459 20 (Dec. 27, 2017) – At most, the employer has shown that the claimant exercised poor judgment in giving an inappropriate assignment to her second graders at a time when she was feeling ill.  Any omissions during an investigative interview were not deliberate, but due to forgetting every person she had spoken to.  Employer's no-contact directive was overbroad and unreasonable.

0019 4026 35

0019 4026 35 (Sept. 28, 2017) – Although the claimant had attendance problems, it was not reasonable for the employer to expect him to forfeit his normally scheduled day off because he had taken an approved, accrued day off that week.

0015 7381 34

0015 7381 34 (Dec. 23, 2015) – Employer’s directive that the claimant, a healthcare supervisor with 50 years of experience as a nurse, not discuss her discipline for objecting to its new protocol for a highly contagious resident with coworkers was unreasonable.

Help Us Improve Mass.gov  with your feedback

Please do not include personal or contact information.
Feedback