Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Edward Walto, No. B-124264.
John J. D'Angelo, with him Bank, Minehart & D'Angelo, for appellant.
Charles G. Hasson, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Wilkinson, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Kramer.
[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 546]
This is an appeal by Edward Walto from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review which denied him benefits. The issue in this case is whether the conduct which caused Walto to be dismissed from his job constituted willful misconduct. We hold that it did and affirm.
Walto was employed as a doorman by Society Hill Towers, Inc. in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. On March 22, 1974 Walto was discharged for various derelictions of duty, including (a) appearing for work with alcohol on his breath, (b) refusing to promptly admit tenants through the door which was in his charge, and (c) conducting himself toward a female tenant in an improper manner. The Board held that Walto's conduct constituted willful misconduct and rendered him ineligible for benefits under Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1
Walto's sole argument in his appeal to this Court is that the Board erred by concluding that his conduct constituted willful misconduct. This argument has no merit. Walto's conduct evidenced both a wanton and willful disregard for his employer's interests, and a flagrant disregard of the standard of behavior which his employer
[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 547]
could rightfully expect of him. The conduct falls squarely within the definition of willful misconduct.*fn2 The Board did not err by concluding that Walto's conduct constituted willful misconduct and rendered him ineligible for benefits.
And Now this 7th day of November, 1975, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated February 4, 1975, denying benefits ...