Miami Employment Lawyer Blog

Many employees come into our Miami offices and ask whether they can be denied unemployment compensation because of an accident, a cash register shortage or similar mistakes at work. The answer is usually no. Under Florida law, an unemployed individual who is otherwise eligible and has met the wage requirements cannot be denied unemployment compensation due to simple negligence. This means that a careless accident or an inadvertent shortage in the cash register will generally not be sufficient to deny unemployment compensation benefits.

Florida law provides that an individual may be disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits if he or she was involved in "misconduct connected with the work." Under the statute, "misconduct" is defined as conduct demonstrating willful disregard of the employer's interests or negligence that demonstrates culpability, wrongful intent or evil design. Simple carelessness or negligence is not sufficient. Specifically, carelessness that does not "manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design" does not constitute "misconduct" within the meaning of the Florida unemployment compensation laws. Furthermore, in defining whether specific employee action constitutes misconduct, courts are required to liberally construe the statute in favor of the employee.

Thus, an individual's conduct at work may be sufficient to justify termination from employment, yet not amount to misconduct sufficient to deny unemployment compensation benefits. Each case, however, must be viewed on its own facts and circumstances. The following examples show how the law is interpreted:

• Where an employee was discharged due to ineptitude and poor work performance that was not a result of a lack of effort, the employee was not denied unemployment compensation benefits.

• Where an employee was given a corrective action plan due to poor performance, his disagreement with the corrective action plan was sufficient to warrant discharge, but insufficient to deny unemployment compensation benefits.

• Bank teller's mistake that cost the bank a significant amount of money was sufficient to warrant discharge, but insufficient to deny her unemployment compensation benefits.

• The use of foul language or vulgarity directed at a supervisor was sufficient to warrant discharge but insufficient to deny unemployment compensation benefits.

It should be noted that a mere isolated violation of a company policy is insufficient to deny an individual unemployment compensation, particularly if the employee was never warned that such a violation could result in discharge. However, if an employee continuously violates company policies, and is warned that further violations will result in termination, it is likely that the employee will be denied unemployment compensation. Also, excessive absenteeism and tardiness that demonstrate a lack of effort are also sufficient to warrant a denial of unemployment compensation benefits.

Therefore, as it can be seen, conduct that will deny unemployment compensation benefits must be fairly egregious and be a willful or wanton disregard of the employer's interests. As indicated by the cases, the conduct must demonstrate an "evil design" or "wrongful intent".