Beckingham v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development

I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that "the reasoning set forth in Jeff-boat and Beene is the better rationale for determining the reasonableness of an employer's attendance policy," and that Indiana Code Section 22-4-15-1(d) "is written in the disjunctive such that we may analyze an attendance issue under section (d)(2) or section (d)(8)" Op. at 482, 484. In Jeffboat and Beene, this court analyzed a claimant's entitlement to unemployment benefits under Section (d)(@2), rather than Section (d)(8), even though those claimants were terminated for ab*485sence-related issues. See Beene v.…