Department of Employment and Economic Development File No. 29858252-3
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kirk, Judge
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012).
Considered and decided by Hudson, Presiding Judge; Kirk, Judge; and Klaphake, Judge.
Retired judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10.
Relator Dustin A. Adamson challenges the decision of the unemployment law judge (ULJ) that he is not entitled to unemployment benefits because he was discharged from respondent Charter Communications LLC for employment misconduct. We conclude there was no factual or legal error in the ULJ's decision and therefore affirm.
Adamson worked for Charter as a technical advisor in a position fielding customer phone calls. He was the subject of two coachings and a verbal warning before being discharged from Charter in June 2012.
The first coaching occurred in December 2011 after Adamson was rude and disrespectful to a supervisor. Charter alleged that Adamson sent an e-mail and chat message to his supervisor using pejorative language to describe an affiliated team of employees. Adamson wrote that "Workforce doesn't know how to do their job," "I refuse to believe they are this ignorant," and "people are rude to me." When his supervisor explained the procedures that Adamson was addressing, Adamson responded that his supervisor was making an "excuse" and that the other team was attempting "to get in people's heads."
The second coaching occurred in February 2012 after Adamson was approached by a team captain while Adamson was on the phone with a customer. Adamson rebuked the team captain, left the customer on hold for more than five minutes, and expressed his disgust with the team captain's behavior in an online group chat.
Adamson then received a verbal warning in April in response to a March incident where his supervisor observed him being rude to two co-workers. Upon witnessing the incident, the supervisor pulled Adamson aside. Adamson argued with his supervisor in a public area and then left for the remainder of the day.
On May 31, a member of Charter's quality-control division contacted Adamson's supervisor after monitoring one of Adamson's customer calls. The quality-control employee heard Adamson disconnect the customer after the customer twice asked to speak to Adamson's supervisor. Charter investigated whether the disconnection came from Adamson's phone or the customer's phone, and determined that the disconnection came from Adamson's phone. The supervisor met with Adamson and advised him that his calls would be monitored for the remainder of the day. On his other calls that day, Adamson was observed providing inaccurate billing information to one customer and ignoring another customer for more than eight minutes while he typed notes. Adamson was instructed to submit to a drug test and then was suspended with pay pending the test results. Charter did not receive the results of the ...