Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Edward Strelinski, No. B-129103.
Timothy P. O'Reilly, 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 Mencer, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Kramer.
This is an appeal by Edward Strelinski (Strelinski) from an Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board), dated December 17, 1975. The Order affirmed a referee's determination that Strelinski had voluntarily terminated his employment without a necessitous and compelling reason and
was therefore ineligible for benefits under Section 402(b)(1) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Act), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(b)(1).
Strelinski had been employed by the Chartiers Mental Health/Mental Retardation Center (Center) for a period of four years. The first three years of his employment were in the capacity of Drug Unit Director. On September 1, 1974, however, Strelinski assumed the post of Acting Executive Director. An Acting Drug Unit Director was appointed to Strelinski's former position. The record is clear that all parties understood from the inception that Strelinski could return to his former position should he not be named Executive Director on a permanent basis.
Strelinski served in the capacity of Acting Executive Director for approximately ten months. While in this position he submitted a request to the Board of Directors that the Acting Drug Unit Director be appointed to that position on a permanent basis. The directors approved this recommendation at their meeting on April 10, 1975. At that same meeting, a person other than Strelinski was appointed permanent Executive Director. These events left Strelinski without a position. The Center's efforts to provide an additional opening for him were unsuccessful and Strelinski submitted his letter of resignation on April 14, 1975, effective April 30, 1975.
Strelinski contends that his letter of resignation should not be viewed as a voluntary termination. He argues that when he wrote the letter there was no position available for him within the Center. His termination was inevitable and his resignation therefore should be considered a formality. We do not agree.
Strelinski's unemployment can be viewed as involuntary only if it occurred through "no fault of his own." Lybarger ...