16 June 2004 @ 04:20 pm
One small victory for Dragons...
FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Claimant was last employed on 5/27/2004
2. The Claimant's job title was Senior Advisor
3. The Claimant was discharged for: rules violations
4. The Claimant was working at the time of the incident which caused the separation
5. Prior warning was not given before the separation.
6. The Claimant's conduct was not serious enough that a dismissal was warranted without a warning.
7. The rules that the Claimant violated do not rise to the level of willful misconduct.

In other words -- suck it, Step-by-Step, unemployment compensation for me!
Current Mood: pleased
( Post a new comment )
(Anonymous) on June 16th, 2004 09:16 pm (UTC)
~cheers~ And those findings look very positive from an external perspective, especially #7. They're saying: "you basically just used this as an excuse to get rid of him without good reason."

SR
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
[identity profile] dragonoflife.livejournal.com on June 16th, 2004 09:20 pm (UTC)
The Discussion section of the letter actually doesn't touch on the issue, but it does specifically say that my employer failed to prove what I did was so serious it merited dismissal without a warning. So yes, it does reflect poorly on them.

But I knew they were looking for an excuse to get rid of me anyway.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
(Anonymous) on June 16th, 2004 09:57 pm (UTC)
Ah, yes, but you can probably quote the findings of fact during an interview if you get asked why you were dismissed.

SR
(Reply) (Parent) (Link)