In an unpublished opinion, the Minnesota Court of Appeals found no problem with the termination of an employee as a result of misconduct when the employer was actually deemed more credible than the employee, and the employee had failed to report extended breaks for lunch or otherwise to the employer as had been agreed upon. This was misconduct because the employee displayed a serious violation of the standards of behavior that the employer had the right to reasonably expect of him and a substantial lack of concern for his employment. McCormick v. Hockenbergs Equipment and Supply Company (Minn. Ct. Ap. 2010). Similarly, it is clear that an employee may be guilty of employment misconduct, eliminating the right to unemployment benefits, if they are terminated for excessive absences. However, if an employer does not follow all of the steps in the progressive discipline policy, which may be considered a contract, no misconduct will be deemed to occur. Recognizing that an employer has the right to expect its employees to work when scheduled, if it has a progressive discipline policy, and there is clear language that it does not need to be followed, failure to follow it will result in ineligibility of the employee for unemployment benefits. Stagg v. Vintage Place, Inc. (Minn. Ct. Ap. 2010)