Appeal No. 43, March T., 1962, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-63526, in re claim of Ralph D. McCullough. Decision affirmed.
Horace J. Culbertson, for claimant, appellant.
Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.
Stanley H. Siegel, with him Siegel and Siegel, for employer, intervening appellee.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.
[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 390]
The claimant, Ralph D. McCullough, in this unemployment compensation appeal, was last employed by the American Viscose Corporation, Lewistown, Pennsylvania, on July 30, 1960. He was suspended on that date because, while in the recreation room on a lunch break, he lighted and threw a firecracker in the direction of a fellow employe who was seriously injured as
[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 391]
a result of the detonation of the firecracker. After a full investigation, the company discharged the claimant on August 17, 1960. The Board of Employment Security denied benefits on the ground that he had been discharged for willful misconduct in accordance with the provisions of § 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS § 802(e). The Referee Reversed the Bureau and allowed benefits. The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review reversed the Referee and denied benefits for the same reason as the Bureau. This appeal followed.
The record shows, and the Board found, that the claimant admitted lighting and throwing the firecracker in the direction of the injured employe; that he did not have a permit to explode firecrackers as is required by the Act of May 15, 1939, P.L. 134, as amended, 35 PS § 1271 et seq.; and that he had knowledge that firecrackers were prohibited by the company from being on the company premises.
Most certainly the claimant was guilty of "a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect from his employee" by his violation of a prohibition of the company regarding firecrackers and where this violation resulted in the serious injury of a fellow employe. His action, therefore, was a deliberate violation of the company's prohibition, and "Willful misconduct" comprehends a deliberate violation of the employer's rules. Gagliardi Unemployment Compensation Case, 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 142, 141 A.2d 410 (1958). See also: Heib Unemployment Compensation Case, 197 Pa. Superior Ct. 387, 178 A.2d 812 (1962). Even without any rule of the company about firecrackers or a prohibition of ...