Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Henry V. Ennis, No. B-110599-B.
Murry Powlen, for appellant.
Daniel R. Schuckers, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Israel Packel, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Rogers, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.
[ 18 Pa. Commw. Page 345]
This is the appeal of Henry V. Ennis from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review sustaining a referee's denial of the appellant's application for unemployment compensation benefits.
[ 18 Pa. Commw. Page 346]
The appellant, a resident of Philadelphia, lost the job which he had held for eight years on January 16, 1971. After an unfruitful search for other employment during which his savings were exhausted, he applied for unemployment compensation benefits in March of 1971. On Friday afternoon, March 26, 1971, as he was about to leave his home for a job interview in Ardmore which he had himself arranged, Mr. Ennis received a telephone call from the Bureau of Employment Security directing him to visit a prospective employer in Northeast Philadelphia during that afternoon. The appellant went to the interview first arranged. On the way to the second interview his automobile broke down in Ardmore, preventing his appearance at the interview arranged by the Bureau. He failed to inform the Bureau or the prospective employer referred by the Bureau of the reason for his nonappearance. When Mr. Ennis appeared for his weekly registration on the following Friday the Bureau declared him ineligible for benefits by Section 402(a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1 A referee affirmed the Bureau and the Board of Review affirmed the referee. Mr. Ennis has appealed to this court.
Section 402(a) provides in pertinent part:
"An employe shall be ineligible for compensation in any week --
"(a) In which his unemployment is due to failure, without good cause, either to apply for suitable work at such time and in such manner as the department may prescribe, or to accept suitable work when offered to him by the employment office or any employer. . . ."
The question here is whether appellant demonstrated good cause for failing to apply for work with the employer referred by the Bureau. The cases hold that whether the good ...