Hungarian term (edited): elh�r�thatatlan magatart�s

Centex does not argue that Anderson’s alleged UNPREVENTABLE CONDUCT goes to the cited standard. Rather, the UNPREVENTABLE CONDUCT was in relation to the 100% tie off rule. The affirmative defense of UNPREVENTABLE EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT requires that the employer have a work rule in place designed to prevent the alleged violation. The defense will not prevail where, as here, the work rule does not correlate to the cited standard. Power Plant Division, Brown & Root, Inc., 10 BNA OSHC 1837 (No. 77-2253, 1983).




Petitioner New York State Electric & Gas Corporation appeals from an order of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission affirming two citations issued for its alleged failure to comply with safety standards. Petitioner contends that the complaint in this action was improperly amended, that the Commission improperly allocated the burden of proof with respect to the employer's knowledge of the safety lapses, that it was improper to conclude that petitioner had such knowledge, and that the lapses constituted UNPREVENTABLE EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT.
Set aside, in part, affirmed, in part, and remanded for further proceedings.