Ariz. Admin. Code § R6-3-5115 - Absence (misconduct 15)
A. General (Misconduct 15.05)
1. Implicit in the work relationship is the
duty of the employee to report for work and remain at work in accordance with
the reasonable requirements of his employer. This duty is not absolute, but is
qualified by circumstances relative to the situation of both employee and
employer. In determining if a claimant's absence from work is a disregard of
his employer's interest due regard must be accorded to the customs and
conditions of work.
2. If it is
customary for employees where the claimant worked to take a day off without
pay, a claimant who does so and is discharged is not deemed to have been
discharged for misconduct unless the circumstances indicate that he could
reasonably have known that his employer would be injured by his
absence.
3. When a claimant is
discharged for not appearing at work on a day when he customarily does not
work, his dismissal is generally for reasons other than misconduct.
4. An exception to the general rules of
absence is the discharge of a claimant because of an absence due to
incarceration for a first offense. Refer to
R6-3-5115(E), "Absence due to incarceration."
B. Notice (Misconduct 15.1)
1. Generally, a claimant's failure to give
proper notice of his absence from work in time to permit the employer to make
such arrangements as he deems necessary to replace him is tantamount to
misconduct connected with the work. However, inability to notify usually
justifies a failure to give notice. If the claimant made all reasonable efforts
to reach his employer, but could not, failure to give notice is not
misconduct.
2. The practices of the
employing establishment should be considered in determining what constitutes
adequate notice. Absences for causes beyond the claimant's control may be
misconduct if the facts establish that notice could have been given and the
employer was inconvenienced, not because of the absence, but because of the
lack of notice. A claimant's absence from work for causes beyond his control
with proper notice at the earliest opportunity is not misconduct. In certain
instances notice of absence is unnecessary or waived such as:
a. When the employer has independent
knowledge of the claimant's inability to be at work; or
b. When it has been established by custom
that notice is unnecessary; or
c.
When a claimant is the recipient of a severe shock such as the death of a
member of his family.
3.
Discharge because of failure to provide notice of absence due to incarceration
should be adjudicated in accordance with rule
R6-3-5115(E).
C. Permission (Misconduct 15.15)
1. It is reasonable for employer(s) to
require that their employees request permission to be absent from work when
such absence may be anticipated. A prudent worker will normally request
permission and will not take time off when his request is refused.
2. When a claimant is denied permission for
an impending absence from work and is absent- despite the employer's refusal,
the necessity for the absence and his employer's reason for not granting
permission must be weighed. The claimant's separation from work under such
circumstances would be considered misconduct connected with his work; unless
a. The employer has denied a legitimate leave
request without valid reason; or
b.
The claimant would suffer serious detriment if he did not take time off work;
or
c. The claimant was absent for a
compelling personal reason.
D. Reasons for absence (Misconduct 15.2)
1. A claimant who is discharged due to
absences beyond his control such as illness, accident, unavoidable delay in
transportation, urgent domestic responsibilities and the like is discharged for
reasons other than misconduct. Even repeated absences for these causes are not
deemed to be misconduct if the facts indicate the absence could not have been
avoided. However, failure to give notice of such absences may constitute
misconduct. Failure to give notice is discussed in
R6-3-5115(B), "Notice."
2. Absence from work due
to reasonably pressing domestic circumstances is not misconduct when proper
notice is given. For example: serious illness or death of a close relative is
deemed of such pressing circumstances as to justify the absence.
3. A claimant's discharge is considered to be
for misconduct connected with his work when he is discharged because of an
absence from work; when
a. He is absent for a
capricious reason; or
b. He is
absent for causes he does not substantiate, or gives no excuse for;
or
c. He is absent from work due to
intoxication.
E. Absence due to incarceration (Misconduct
15.25)
1. A discharge for absence due to
incarceration is disqualifying when:
a. The
claimant did not properly notify, or failed to make a reasonable effort to
properly notify the employer of his absence; or
b. The evidence clearly indicates that the
claimant could have avoided his incarceration by the payment of a fine;
or
c. The claimant was incarcerated
for a second time while working for his last employer; or
d. The claimant was confined for a period in
excess of 24 hours, and the available evidence tends to establish that he
committed the offense for which he was confined.
2. A claimant who is discharged because of an
absence or failure to give notice due to incarceration is separated from work
for a compelling personal reason not attributable to his employer when the
separation is determined not to be misconduct under rule
R6-3-5115(E)(1).
3. If a claimant
was discharged because of the offense which caused his incarceration the
determination should be based on rule
R6-3-51490, "Violation of law".
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.