Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Frank A. Greenwich.
David Freeman, for appellant.
Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Kramer, Mencer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Kramer.
This is an appeal filed by Frank A. Greenwich (Greenwich) from an order of the Unemployment Compensation
Board of Review (Board) dated March 16, 1972, denying Greenwich unemployment compensation benefits.
Greenwich was employed by Whitman's Chocolate Division of Pet, Inc. (Whitman) for approximately 28 years. At the time of his termination, Greenwich was a night supervisor for Whitman. Greenwich suffered sporadically through the years 1969-1970 from toxic cirrhosis, which was apparently caused by chemicals with which he came in contact at work. Greenwich's last day of work for Whitman was February 4, 1970, at which time he properly reported his absence due to illness. Whitman subsequently received a medical certificate indicating that Greenwich would be able to return to work on April 6, 1970. Consequently, Whitman made an appointment for Greenwich to see the company doctor on April 6, 1970. Greenwich failed to appear for this appointment. The company arranged another medical examination on April 8, 1970, which Greenwich also failed to attend. Still another appointment was scheduled for April 13, 1970, and Greenwich was absent once again. A fourth attempt was made to schedule the medical examination; this time the date was set for April 20, 1970. Whitman informed Greenwich that if he failed to appear for this examination, his employment would be terminated. On April 20, 1970, Greenwich called Whitman and requested that the appointment be postponed until April 21, 1970. Whitman agreed, and on April 21, Greenwich once again requested that he be given a one-day postponement. This request was also granted.
Greenwich reported to the company doctor on April 22, 1970. The doctor's notes indicate that Greenwich was unable to work at this time. The doctor further noted that although Greenwich denied alcoholic intake, he appeared to be in an "alcoholic debauch." Another
appointment was scheduled for April 24, 1970, if Greenwich was "able." Greenwich did not report for this examination. Consequently, Greenwich was informed by letter dated April 24, 1970 that his employment was terminated.
Greenwich applied for unemployment compensation benefits. His request was denied by the Bureau of Employment Security, and he took an appeal. A hearing was held; after which, the referee found that Greenwich's behavior constituted wilful misconduct, and compensation was denied. Greenwich appealed to the Board and another hearing was held. As a result of this hearing, the Board affirmed the referee, and Greenwich appealed to this Court. On the Board's petition, the case was remanded and an ...