merge this statement of facts

8/3/2019 Merge This Statement of Facts

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/merge-this-statement-of-facts 1/3

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On July 23, 2011, this board established that Unemployment compensation

benefits were allowed and that there was not a willful or intentional misconduct by Ms.

Clark. The determination was that Ms. Clark was acting within her duties when she

removed the meds from the doctor¶s office as it was a part of her responsibilities. Notice

of Determination lines 7-8

Ms. Mary Clark (Ms. Clark) was terminated from her employment with Dr. Fitter

(Employer) when she stated, ³no way was she quitting,[Employer] had to fire her.´

OESC request for add info pg.1.Ms. Clark expressly stated that she was not quitting in

response was to being asked to sign a form admitting wrongdoing.

Employer admits they were merely going to counsel Ms. Clark during a meeting.

However, instead of counseling Ms. Clark, Employer admits to responding ³okay´ to Ms.

Clark statement it had to fire her. Employer justifies its act of firing Ms. Clark claiming,

³she didn¶t let us counsel her, she blew up and walked out.´ Employer alleges it wanted

to counsel Ms. Clark for seeking a sympathetic ear from a co-worker while in an

emotional state of tears and borrowing a cigarette. Employer does not offer any

documentation that any such counseling had taken place prior to the meeting with Ms.

Clark.

Employer attempts to characterize Ms. Clark¶s conduct as insubordination,

gossiping, and lack of trust. Employer hired Ms. Clark to be responsible for ordering and



checking in medications in Employer¶s office. However, on the day in question,

Employer¶s office manager, Holly, placed an order of herbal meds on the desk of one of

the doctors without checking with Ms. Clark as to why it was ordered. Dr. Fitter had no

idea what the sample meds were because he did not know it was being sent. Ms. Clark

removed the order of herbal supplements from the doctor¶s office as part of her assigned

duties. OESC notice of determination She took them back to the medication room to

check the order in and sample it. Employer then informed Ms. Clark that it was

inappropriate to remove the meds from the doctor¶s office. Employer never gave Ms.

Clark an opportunity to discuss the issue with Dr. Fitter. OESC request for add info pg.1.

Ms. Clark believes that Dr. Fitter would have understood the mix up with the office

manager failing to check in the meds, had she been given the chance to speak with him.

Nevertheless, a meeting was called between Ms. Clark, Holly, Employer¶s HR manager,

and Dr. Fitter to confront Ms. Clark about the meds being removed from the doctor¶s

office. During the meeting, Employer confronted Ms. Clark about the meds that were

removed from the doctor¶s office. Employer stated that Ms. Clark looked puzzled by the

assertion and that she stated that the drug rep sent them (samples) to everyone in the

office.

Employer admits that it did not know if Ms. Clark realized how serious the

incident was. Employer¶s assertion of an invasion of privacy by removing the meds to be

checked in was upsetting to Ms. Clark. Employer stated that Ms. Clark would be given

the opportunity to resign. Employer¶s Internal Memo #3(a) However, Employer did not



give Ms. Clark the opportunity to bring her resignation the next day. Employer admits

that if Ms. Clark did not resign, it would fire her. Employer¶s alleged resignation form it

handed Ms. Clark to sign was an admission of wrongdoing, rather than a resignation

form. Although Employer alleges that the act of Ms. Clark performing one of her

assigned duties was a violation the employee handbook provisions, Hearing pg. 2,lines 3-

4, none of these alleged violations are in its original documentation of Ms. Clark¶s

dismissal of May 20, 2011.

merge this statement of facts

Documents