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.

BAKER UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (11/16/60)

November 16, 1960

BAKER UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.


Appeal, No. 288, Oct. T., 1960, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-57316, in re claim of Anna May F. Baker. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

Irwin No. Rosenzweig, for appellant.

Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him Anne X. Alpern, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

Before Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, Watkins, and Montgomery, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).

Author: Ervin

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 461]

OPINION BY ERVIN, J.

In this unemployment compensation case the claimant was refused benefits by the bureau, the referee and the board for two reasons, (1) because she voluntarily terminated her employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature and was disqualified from receiving benefits under the provisions of § 402(b) of the law, and (2) because she would accept a job only until recalled by her former employer and therefore she was not genuinely attached to the labor market and was disqualified from receiving benefits under the provisions of § 401(d) of the law.

Since we have determined that the decision of the board must be affirmed because of the provisions of § 401(d) rather than § 402(b), we will consider only the provisions of § 401(d).

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 462]

Section 401(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS § 801(d), requires as a qualification for the securing of compensation that the claimant be "able to work and available for suitable work; ..."

In the Pinto Unemployment Compensation Case, 168 Pa. Superior Ct. 540, 79 A.2d 802, we stated that "one may render himself unavailable for work by conditions and limitations as to employment. Willingness to be employed conditionally does not necessarily meet the test of availability. The determination of availability is largely a question of fact for the Board." See also Bernotas Unemployment Compensation Case, 175 Pa. Superior Ct. 437, 106 A.2d 638; Stratton Unemployment Compensation Case, 179 Pa. Superior Ct. 597, 117 A.2d 807.

Availability for work requires that a claimant should actually and currently be attached to the labor force: Rabinowitz Unemployment Compensation Case, 177 Pa. Superior Ct. 236, 110 A.2d 792.

The board found as facts: "4. While employed by Gimbel Brothers the claimant was offered permanent employment. She indicated to the employer that she could not accept permanent employment inasmuch as ...


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.