Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Raymond P. Mackanic, No. B-144693.
Richard E. Gordon, with him William C. Knapp, for appellant.
Daniel Schuckers, Assistant Attorney General, with him Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Wilkinson, Jr. and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.
[ 37 Pa. Commw. Page 348]
Raymond P. Mackanic, Claimant, appeals a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) affirming a denial of benefits by the Bureau of Employment Security.
Claimant was a fabricating machine operator for the Copperweld Steel Company (Employer) and was required to produce 14,800 pounds of material per day. He consistently produced an output considerably above the per diem requirement and was one day approached
[ 37 Pa. Commw. Page 349]
by several of his co-workers who, fearing that the minimum production level for each machine operator would be raised to Claimant's production level, told Claimant that unless he kept his output to the minimum level, he and his family would be "dealt with." The threat was repeated several times and Claimant's wife received several threatening phone calls. Alarmed at this situation, Claimant sought the counsel of Employer's Manager of Industrial Relations and was advised that he could be transferred to another department within the plant. Because the plant is a self-contained unit, Claimant feared that he would not be able to avoid contact with those who threatened him and that the threats would continue and be carried out upon him and his family. He, therefore, decided to terminate his employment.
Claimant's application for unemployment compensation benefits was denied because his actions were deemed to fall within the disqualifying language of Section 402 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(b)(1), which provides in pertinent part:
An employe shall be ineligible for compensation for any week --
(b)(1) In which his unemployment is due to voluntarily leaving work without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature. . . .
In affirming the denial of benefits, the Board found that Claimant's refusal to accept a transfer to another department within the plant, at least on a temporary basis, was unreasonable and indicated a ...