Erber v. Federal Exp. Corp., 81-757
| Decision Date | 10 February 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-757,81-757 |
| Citation | 409 So.2d 522 |
| Parties | Ira A. ERBER, Appellant, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION and Department of Labor and Unemployment Security, State of Florida, Unemployment Appeals Commission, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bill McCabe of Sheperd, McCabe & Cooley, Orlando, for appellant.
James R. Parks and Norman A. Blessing, Tallahassee, for appellee, Unemployment Appeals Com'n.
This is an appeal from an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission which denied the appellant unemployment compensation. We have jurisdiction under section 120.68(2), Florida Statutes (1981), and we reverse the order.
Appellant was employed by Federal Express as a fleet supervisor, in charge of vehicle maintenance. One of the employees appellant supervised was caught falsifying his time records. When confronted by appellant and the City Manager of the Orlando Federal Express office, the employee was given the choice of either resigning or being discharged. The employee chose to resign and listed "personal reasons" as the reason for his resignation.
In accordance with company procedure the employee had an "exit interview" with appellant's supervisor who then discovered the "resign or be fired" choice the employee had to make. This supervisor determined appellant had acted improperly in failing to inform the company of the real reason for the termination and in failing to follow proper procedure requiring discussion of planned disciplinary actions with supervisors. On a Friday evening appellant was instructed to reinstate the employee effective that Sunday evening. Upon receiving those instructions appellant called an officer of the company and protested the instructions. That officer said he would look into the matter and discuss it with the appellant on Monday. On Monday the officer told appellant to reinstate the employee, which he did.
Appellant was discharged by Federal Express for misconduct. The statute provides that no unemployment benefits may be received if an employee is discharged for misconduct. Sec. 443.101(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981).
Misconduct is defined in the statute as:
'Misconduct' includes, but is not limited to, the following, which shall not be construed in pari materia with each other:
a) Conduct evincing such willful or wanton disregard of an employer's interests as is found in deliberate violation or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee; or
b) Carelessness or negligence of such a degree or recurrence as to manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pascarelli v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n
...termination, do not constitute misconduct precluding unemployment compensation. Hummer, 573 So.2d at 137. In Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), an employee was held not to be disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits where the employee did not follow ......
-
LaRocca v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n
...So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Pallas v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 578 So.2d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). See also Paul v. Jabil Circuit Co., 627 So.2d 545 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Nelson v. Burdines, Inc., 611 So.2d 1329 (Fla......
-
Ash v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, Case No. 1D03-1095 (Fla. App. 1st Dist. 5/4/2004)
...DCA 1995); Smith v. Krugman-Kadi, 547 So.2d 677 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), review denied, 558 So.2d 20 (Fla.1990); Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)." Cohen v. Unemplmt. App. Comm'n, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D701 (Fla. 3d DCA Mar. 24, REVERSED AND REMANDED. WEBSTER and BE......
-
LaCHARITE v. State, 1D04-1477.
...are usually required, rather than a single act of insubordination, in order to amount to "misconduct." See Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)(concluding that the claimant, who was discharged for failing to follow the company procedure for disciplining an emplo......