Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

FRANCIS J. SWEENEY ET AL. v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD REVIEW (01/14/55)

January 14, 1955

FRANCIS J. SWEENEY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, APPELLEE, CAREY, BAXTER & KENNEDY, INC., INTERVENING APPELLEE. (SWEENEY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.)



Appeal, No. 25, Oct. T., 1954, by claimants, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated August 19, 1953, decision No. B-35000, in re claim of Francis J. Sweeney et al. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

A. W. McMichael, Tamaqua, for claimants, appellants.

William L. Hammond, Special Deputy Attorney General, with him Frank F. Truscott, Attorney General, for appellee.

Charles W. Hull, William H. Wood, Hull, Leiby & Hetzger, Harrisburg, for intervening appellee, Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Ross, Gunther, Wright and Ervin, JJ. (hirt and Woodside, JJ., absent).

Author: Rhodes

[ 177 Pa. Super. Page 244]

OPINION BY RHODES, P.J.,

The question raised by this appeal in an unemployment compensation case is whether claimant and 144 others, similarly situated, were disqualified to receive unemployment compensation benefits for the weeks involved because of their refusal, without good cause, to accept suitable work. Claimants were found ineligible -p245

[ 177 Pa. Super. Page 245]

    to receive benefits for the claim weeks following their refusal to accept offered employment.

Section 402 (a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law of 1936, as amended, 43 PS ยง 802 (a), provides: "An employe shall be ineligible for compensation for any week - (a) In which his unemployment is due to failure, without good cause..., to accept suitable work when offered to him... by any employer: ..."

There is no substantial dispute about the facts. Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc., had formerly employed about 270 men, including the 145 claimants, in a strip mining operation at the Greenwood Forty Foot and Mammoth Stripping Operation on land of the Lehigh Navigation Coal Company near Tamaqua, Pennsylvania. As of September 30, 1950, Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc., ceased this operation and laid off the 270 men, including claimants. Subsequently, and at least by November 13, 1950, Fauzio Brothers, by contract with Lehigh Navigation Coal Company, agreed to resume the production of coal at the Greenwood stripping operation formerly conducted by Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc. Between November 14, 1950, and December 18, 1950, Fauzio Brothers, by registered mail, offered work to each of the 145 claimants at this stripping operation under working conditions which were substantially identical with those in effect under the previous employment with Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc. Specifically, the offer stated the rates of pay and working conditions would be "similar to rates and conditions on all Fauzio ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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