statute to consider the meaning of the words “no fault of the employee” in section 214(1)(D) or (E). However, in Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc., 678 A.2d 583, 589-90 (Me.1996), we considered whether termination for cause from post-injury employment constituted a refusal of a bona fide offer of employment that would result in a suspension of benefits pursuant to section 214(1)(A). [¶ 11] We concluded “that an employee’s termination for cause is not included among the statutory grounds for suspending benefits pursuant to subsection 214(1)(A). Considering the plain language of our statute, we are unable to equate an employee’s termination for cause with a ‘refusal’ of an ‘offer’ of employment.” Id. at 590. But see Holt v. Sch. Admin. Dist. No. 6, 2001 ME 146, ¶¶ 7, 8, 782 A.2d 779, 782 (<HOLDING>). [¶ 12] The Statement of Fact that accompanies
holding where employee handbook and employment offer letter disclaimed creation of employment contract that employees testimony of his understanding of terms of agreement did not raise fact issue of specific express and clear agreement contradicting the express provisions of the personnel manual and the employment offer letter holding that employee had duty to mitigate damages following breach of employment contract by accepting offer of reinstatement holding covenant in an employment agreement executed some 12 years after the initial taking of employment was not incident to the taking of employment holding voluntary resignation from postinjury employment not compelled by good and reasonable cause constitutes refusal of an offer of reasonable employment by which employee relinquished entitlement to benefits holding that a postinjury arbitration agreement was not part of a employment contract when a seamans continued employment was not conditioned upon its execution