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.

CARPENTER UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (07/21/55)

July 21, 1955

CARPENTER UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.


Appeal, No. 95, April T., 1955, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, decision No. B-38418, in re claim of Dorothea Carpenter. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

Wallace E. Edgecombe, with him Robert Van der Voort, and Van der Voort, Royston, Robb & Leonard, for appellant.

William L. Hammond, Special Deputy Attorney General, with him Herbert B. Cohen, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Ross, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, and Ervin, JJ.

Author: Ervin

[ 178 Pa. Super. Page 640]

OPINION BY ERVIN, J.

This is an appeal by claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirming the decision of the referee disallowing benefits on the ground that claimant had voluntarily left her employment without good cause within the meaning of § 402(b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law of 1936, as amended, 43 PS § 802(b).

The board adopted the referee's findings which are as follows: "1. The claimant was last employed by the Viko Furniture Company, Eldred, Pennsylvania, as a degreaser operator at an hourly wage rate of 95 cents. Her regular work week was from Monday through Friday. She commenced work on February 2, 1953, and her last day worked was August 27, 1954, when she voluntarily terminated her employment.

"2. Prior to the claimant's last day worked, she requested a transfer to another shift due to her dissatisfaction with working with one of the other employes. Because no vacancy existed, this request for a change of shift was not granted by the employer, and the claimant thereupon terminated her employment."

Our examination of the record clearly discloses that the findings are supported by substantial evidence. In her petition for appeal from the decision of the bureau claimant made the following statement: "Don't agree with the decision. for two year I have asked for a tranferred and could not get one because we did not get along." In her interview with the appeal clerk in the local office of the bureau the claimant executed a signed statement with respect to the circumstances surrounding her separation in which

[ 178 Pa. Super. Page 641]

    she admitted that: "I quit my job on August 27th when they refused to transfer me to another job." The personnel director testified at the referee's hearing that when he called claimant on the telephone to inquire why she had not reported for work on the Monday and Tuesday following her last day at work on Friday, August 27, the claimant told him she wanted to get a "transfer on nights." He stated that he told her there was no vacancy available and that the night shift would shortly be discontinued. When he then inquired what her intentions were he testified that claimant replied: "Well, I guess I'll quit." This evidence clearly supports the findings of the referee, adopted by the board, that claimant voluntarily terminated her employment because she was unable to obtain a transfer to the night shift. Findings of the board which are supported by substantial competent evidence are binding on us. D'Yantone Unemployment Compensation Case, 159 Pa. Superior Ct. 15, 46 A.2d 525. Any employe who refuses to work a particular shift because of domestic circumstances voluntarily terminates his employment without good cause under § 402(b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, as amended by the Act of August 24, 1953, P.L. 1397, 43 PS § 802. Spotts Unemployment Compensation Case, 176 Pa. Superior Ct. 484, 109 A.2d 212.

The remaining question for determination is: Did the refusal of the employer to transfer claimant to the night shift constitute "good ...


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.