Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Carmella Wenrich, No. B-137927.
Sanford S. Marateck, with him Frank J. Konopka, and Lark, Makowski, Marateck & Konopka, for appellant.
William J. Kennedy, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Rogers, Blatt and DiSalle, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge DiSalle.
[ 34 Pa. Commw. Page 187]
This case is before us upon a petition for review of an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which disallowed the appeal of Carmella Wenrich (Claimant) from a referee's decision denying her unemployment compensation benefits. The referee determined that the Claimant
[ 34 Pa. Commw. Page 188]
was ineligible for benefits pursuant to 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), for voluntarily terminating her employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature.
Claimant worked as a turner for Len-Jef Inc. for approximately five years. On June 8, 1976, Claimant left her employment. For a period of time previous to this date, Claimant suffered from headaches and nervous tension. Prior to leaving, she presented to her employer two medical certificates which reflected her physician's advice that she leave her employment. The first certificate presented stated that the Claimant was advised to take a leave of absence but was able to accept employment as of July 6, 1976. The contents of the second certificate are not part of the record.
On July 2, 1976, Claimant applied for unemployment compensation benefits. The Bureau of Employment Security disallowed her application and Claimant appealed. A hearing before a referee was conducted on September 23, 1976. Claimant was not represented by legal counsel at this hearing.
The referee found that the Claimant had voluntarily terminated her employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature and denied her benefits pursuant to Section 402(b)(1) of the Act. Claimant's appeal to the Board was disallowed upon consideration of the record and she petitioned this Court for review of the Board's determination.
Admittedly, the medical certificate entered into evidence discloses that the Claimant was advised by her physician to quit her employment. The same certificate states that the Claimant was able to ...