Appeal, No. 7, April T., 1963, by employer, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board or Review, Nos. B-4-D-3105, B-4-B-2373, B-4-B-2374, B-4-D-3104, B-4-D-3106, B-72621, in re claims of Roy W. Nelson et al. Decision affirmed.
John G. Wayman, with him Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, for employer, appellant.
Sidney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.
Sidney G. Handler, with him Jerome H. Gerber, for claimants, intervening appellees.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.
[ 202 Pa. Super. Page 427]
Claimants, who were employes of the appellant steel company, were laid off because of a strike on a
[ 202 Pa. Super. Page 428]
railroad which is wholly owned by the steel company and, as a common carrier, serves the plants where the claimants worked and other plants not owned by the steel company. The employer appeals from the decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in favor of the claimants.
The board found that the claimants had no dispute with their employer and did not participate in the strike or institute a work stoppage. It further found that claimants were not employed by the employer who was engaged in the labor dispute and concluded that their unemployment was not due to a labor dispute at the factory, establishment or premises at which they were employed within the meaning of § 402(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law. This is in accord with what we decided in Yevcak Unemployment Compensation Case, 176 Pa. Superior Ct. 69, 106 A.2d 919 (1954), and the Board's decision must be affirmed.
The Unemployment Compensation Act of December 5, 1936, P.L. (1937) 2897, § 402(d), as amended, 43 PS § 802(d), makes a claimant ineligible for compensation if his unemployment is due to a stoppage of work, which exists because of a labor dispute (other than a lock-out) at the factory, ...