Appeals, Nos. 91 to 96, inclusive, by claimants, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, Nos. B-68872, B-68873, B-68874, B-68875, and B-68876, in re claims of Mary M. Gavlick et al. Decision affirmed.
William A. Steckel and Kenneth B. Lee, for appellants, submitted a brief.
Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him David Stahl, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.
[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 622]
This is an appeal from the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review which held the claimants to be ineligible for unemployment compensation under Section 402(a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS § 802(a), because of their failure to accept suitable work when offered to them.
The plant in which the claimants were working closed down and the claimants were referred to another employer. Each of them told the prospective employer that she would accept employment there but would return to her former employment in her home community if and when she was recalled. There is no claim that the proposed employment was in any way unsuitable by reason of distance from their home community or otherwise. The board found that the statements that they would leave the new employment if the old plant was reopened placed such conditions upon the acceptance of new employment as prevented their being hired. It concluded that this could not be considered such a good faith acceptance of suitable work as the act requires. This decision of the board of review is in accord with the law as declared by this court: Trabold Unemployment Compensation Case, 191 Pa. Superior Ct. 485, 159 A.2d 272 (1960).