Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GRAY v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD REVIEW. (GRAY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.) (01/17/52)

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


January 17, 1952

GRAY
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW. (GRAY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.)

COUNSEL

William Gray, in pro. per., for appellant.

William L. Hammond, Sp. Deputy Atty. Gen., Robert E. Woodside, Atty. Gen., Bruce E. Cooper, Associate Counsel, Harrisburg, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross and Arnold, JJ.

[ 170 Pa. Super. Page 198]

PER CURIAM.

The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review denied benefits to the claimant because he had voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Section 402(b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, as amended, 43 P.S. ยง 802(b).

For more than four years appellant had been employed by the American Dredging Company as a deck hand. The nature of its business was such that the employer hired crews only for the duration of a particular job. Upon its completion there would normally be a short layoff until another job was begun.

The company could not determine in advance when work would again be available, and the employes kept in touch with their union representative in charge of hiring, and were by him advised thereof. The claimant was a member of the union and had followed this procedure all through the time that he worked for the company. The last he worked was in January, 1950. After that date he did not contact either the union representative or the company in order to be reassigned to

[ 170 Pa. Super. Page 199]

    work. Work was available for him in February and March, 1950, but he chose to file for benefits beginning April 6, 1950.

Clearly claimant forfeited any right to benefits. He deliberately failed to take the steps which were required of him, and which he formerly had taken, to assure his reassignment to work. The Board's holding that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause was correct. He knew the nature of the business and the procedure for reporting for work reassignment, and he made no effort to return to duty.

Decision affirmed.

GUNTHER, J., absent.

19520117

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.