Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Alexander v MESC 14.07

Section 29(1)(f)

INCARCERATION, Disciplinary suspension

CITE AS: Alexander v MESC, 4 Mich App 378 (1966).

Appeal pending: No

Claimant: Ben Alexander, Jr.

Employer: Continental Motors Corp

Docket No: B64 1365 RM 32738

COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: A discharge which results from absences due to an incarceration for a non-traffic related offense is absolutely disqualifying.

FACTS: The claimant was sentenced to sixty days in jail for a non-work related assault and battery. He served fifty days. While jailed the claimant was discharged for being a three day no-call no-show. After his release the claimant's union was able to get the claimant's discharge reduced to a disciplinary suspension and have the claimant reinstated.

DECISION: The claimant was disqualified for benefits.

RATIONALE: The incarceration provision is meant as an absolute bar to the receipt of benefits in all cases except traffic violations which result in less than ten (10) days of consecutive absence or sentences which provide for day parole and is "not something which the employer and union could later negate by agreement."



Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page