DC 400.4 Other

Click on the case numbers below to access eligibility decisions addressing whether a claimant's rule violation or deliberate misconduct was mitigated by circumstances that do not fall under another index topic.

0024 3831 85

0024 3831 85 (June 25, 2020)  The claimant could not work or find coverage for her shift due to factors over which she had no control.  Under the circumstances, enforcement of the employer’s strict policy requiring finding a replacement or being fired was unreasonable.  She is eligible for benefits under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2).

0032 9964 35

0032 9964 35 (May 20, 2020)  After complaining about a coworker’s sexual harassment, the claimant was subject to continued harassing behavior.  Her angry responses were reasonable under the circumstances, even if disruptive to the workplace.  Held the claimant did not engage in deliberate misconduct in wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, but that any misconduct was due to mitigating circumstances. 

0025 5481 67

0025 5481 67 (Feb. 27, 2019) – Claimant refused to sign three disciplinary action forms, because she felt they were factually wrong, even though the employer made it clear that she would be fired for refusing to sign.  Disagreement with the factual allegations did not constitute mitigating circumstances, where she could have expressed her disagreement in the space provided for the employee’s response on each form.  Held claimant was discharged for deliberate misconduct in wilful disregard of the employer’s interest.

0025 0774 89

0025 0774 89 (Nov. 16, 2018) – Claimant was discharged for not reporting to work due to the effects of snow storm, including a downed power line blocking her driveway. She is not disqualified under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2), because her failure to go to work on the final day was not deliberate or done in wilful disregard of the employer’s interests, but was attributable to circumstances beyond her control.

0023 8366 01

0023 8366 01 (Sept. 27, 2018) – Claimant assistant store manager, who was fired for bringing her grandchildren to work after a final warning that threatened discharge if she brought the children to work again, established mitigating circumstances. She had no alternative care for her grandchildren, her daughter did not pick up the children as scheduled (or respond to messages), her manager did not return calls asking how to proceed, and the claimant was afraid she would be discharged if she failed to open the store she managed.

0019 4380 59

0019 4380 59 (June 29, 2017) – Claimant left his shift early after his supervisor warned him not to and was subsequently fired.  The Board disqualified him under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(e)(2) for deliberate misconduct in wilful disregard of the employer's interest.  Being tired did not provide mitigating circumstances. 

Help Us Improve Mass.gov  with your feedback

Please do not include personal or contact information.
Feedback