Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Miller Petroleum, Inc. v Beatty 12.96

Section 29(1)(b)

MISCONDUCT, Handgun, False statement on employment application

CITE AS: Miller Petroleum, Inc. v Beatty, Benzie Circuit Court No. 84-2643-AE (January 27, 1986).

Appeal pending: No

Claimant: Earnest R. Beatty

Employer: Miller Petroleum Inc.,

Docket No. B83-21172-95087

CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Claimant's conduct of bringing a handgun into work on two occasions is disqualifying misconduct.

FACTS: The claimant worked for the employer as a cashier/clerk at a convenience store, sometimes handling large sums of money. The employer became aware the claimant brought a handgun to work on at least two days, contrary to the employer's implied policy. Claimant admitted to the essence of the allegations when confronted and was fired. The claimant's application for employment did not disclose the claimant had a previous criminal conviction for malicious destruction of a former co-worker's property. The application also omitted two former employers.

DECISION: The claimant is disqualified for misconduct.

RATIONALE: While Section 29(1)(b) is to be liberally construed, the court was "not inclined to construe Section 29(1)(b) of the MES Act so liberally as to foster the bringing of handguns into the workplace." The court also found "common sense and sound public policy dictate a finding that even a remedial statute, such as Section 29(1)(b) of the MES Act ought not be read so broadly as to foster endangerment of lives." The court distinguished Streeter v River Rouge Board of Education, Wayne Cty Cir Ct, 1980, (No.80-017-522-AE) on the basis Streeter involved a single instance where the claimant had been threatened and there was a genuine direct and immediate concern for the claimant's safety. Additionally the claimant's actions of falsifying his application by neglecting to include items of importance to the employer was substantial enough by itself to constitute an act of misconduct and when the handgun incidents are coupled with the falsification of the claimant's application for employment they necessarily amount to disqualifying misconduct.


9, 6, d3: N/A

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page