UI Decision 1/4/2002

Automotive technician discharged after thirteen years for "refusal to perform assigned work," a rule violation, with no warning after he refused to switch from one priority assignment to another. Board, applying Still v. DET, finds no intent to violate the rule since claimant reasonably thought he was acting in the employer's interest. This decision illustrates how rule violation analysis is converging again toward misconduct analysis in the wake of the Still decision. BR-83343 Advocate: Ilene Titus, private practitioner