What statute denies unemployment for property damage to the business?

[adare]

an employee was involved with property damage and has been deemed eligible for unemployment benefits. I claimed it as misconduct, however they are eligible for benefits under that claim. Can someone tell me the proper reason to appeal this decision?

Here are more details and maybe that might help further....The employee was observed via security camera opening the door for her friend while he carried out the property. Then out of camera view the property was destroyed in the parking lot. She was the only person seen exiting the building at that time and they did carry out the destroyed property. This was followed up with a police report that was submitted. Initially, she was DENIED eligibility, appealed and then won. I have the opportunity to appeal right now, however the determination stated that she was not ineligible for benefits under 820 ILCS 405/602A.
Under what grounds should I pursue?

[chason62]

The unemployment benefits rules apply. About the only thing that allows unemployment benefits is if the company has let the employee go due to downsizing or going out of business. I don't know of anyone getting unemployment for being fired for cause or simply quitting on their own volition. Criminal damage is a cause for dismissal. I really don't see how she can be eligible - but you and I don't make those decisions.

[osbourne]

(820 ILCS 405/602) (from Ch. 48, par. 432)
Sec. 602. Discharge for misconduct - Felony. A. An individual shall be ineligible for benefits for the week in which he has been discharged for misconduct connected with his work and, thereafter, until he has become reemployed and has had earnings equal to or in excess of his current weekly benefit amount in each of four calendar weeks which are either for services in employment, or have been or will be reported pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act by each employing unit for which such services are performed and which submits a statement certifying to that fact. The requalification requirements of the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have been satisfied, as of the date of reinstatement, if, subsequent to his discharge by an employing unit for misconduct connected with his work, such individual is reinstated by such employing unit. For purposes of this subsection, the term "misconduct" means the deliberate and willful violation of a reasonable rule or policy of the employing unit, governing the individual's behavior in performance of his work, provided such violation has harmed the employing unit or other employees or has been repeated by the individual despite a warning or other explicit instruction from the employing unit.
B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no benefit rights shall accrue to any individual based upon wages from any employer for service rendered prior to the day upon which such individual was discharged because of the commission of a felony in connection with his work, or because of theft in connection with his work, for which the employer was in no way responsible; provided, that the employer notified the Director of such possible ineligibility within the time limits specified by regulations of the Director, and that the individual has admitted his commission of the felony or theft to a representative of the Director, or has signed a written admission of such act and such written admission has been presented to a representative of the Director, or such act has resulted in a conviction or order of supervision by a court of competent jurisdiction; and provided further, that if by reason of such act, he is in legal custody, held on bail or is a fugitive from justice, the determination of his benefit rights shall be held in abeyance pending the result of any legal proceedings arising therefrom.
(Source: P.A. 85-956.)

[Kellen]

If she leave due to their fault than i think she is not entitle of that unemployment benefit.But if she is fires by the company even on the violation than she may has right to get the unemployment benefit.Even she damages any property.

[Albert]

I think if she destroy any property than the company fire that person rather than to pay them unemployment benefit.As she is not fired for destroying property so she is eligible for getting the unemployment benefit and she also win the case so its mean she didn't distroy the property.