W. J. Krencewicz, Shenandoah, for appellant.
Roland M. Morgan, Associate Counsel, Harrisburg, William L. Hammond, Special Deputy Attorney General, Charles J. Margiotti, Attorney General, for appellee.
Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross, Arnold and Gunther, JJ.,
[ 167 Pa. Super. Page 548]
This is an unemployment compensation case in which the bureau, the referee, and the Unemployment
[ 167 Pa. Super. Page 549]
Compensation Board of Review disallowed compensation. The claimant has appealed from the decision of the Board.
The claimant was employed as a sewing machine operator by M. Janowitch & Sons, Mahanoy City, Pennsylvania. On October 28, 1949, she ceased her employment with that company to act as a housekeeper for a party in Elizabeth, New Jersey, where, being dissatisfied with her working conditions, she remained less than a day.
The Board found that claimant had voluntarily terminated her employment with M. Janowitch & Sons on October 28, 1949, and that she was disqualified under the provisions of section 402(b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law of December 5, 1936, P.L. (1937) 2897, § 402, as amended by the Act of June 30, 1947, P.L. 1186, § 2, 43 P.S. § 802(b).
Section 402(b) provides that an employee shall be ineligible for compensation for any week in which his or her unemployment is due to voluntarily leaving work without good cause.
Claimant contends that the findings of the Board are unjustifiable and are not supported by the testimony in the record, and that claimant did not voluntarily terminate her employment, but upon returning to work, after leave of absence, was informed that there was no work available.
Claimant asserts that she was given leave of absence by her employer, M. Janowitch & Sons, in order that she might take the ...