Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GRAVURE DIVISION TRIANGLE PUBLICATIONS v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (12/28/78)

decided: December 28, 1978.

GRAVURE DIVISION OF TRIANGLE PUBLICATIONS, INC., PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Dennis Coram, No. B-140387-B.

COUNSEL

Richard S. Meyer, with him Dilworth, Paxson, Kalish, Levy & Kauffman, for petitioner.

Michael Klein, Assistant Attorney General, with him Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for respondent.

Judges Crumlish, Jr., Wilkinson, Jr. and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.

Author: Crumlish

[ 39 Pa. Commw. Page 425]

This is an appeal by the Gravure Division of Triangle Publications, Inc. (Employer) from a decision

[ 39 Pa. Commw. Page 426]

    of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) reversing the referee who disallowed benefits to Dennis Coram (Claimant).

We affirm the Board.

Claimant was one of approximately 15 extra employees in Employer's Paper-Handling Department and was called upon to fill in for regular workers who were on vacation or sick leave. As Employer's needs required, extra employees were called for work according to seniority. The Union Shop Steward is solely responsible for following the "call-up" procedure. Until July 27, 1975, Claimant was first in seniority and had been called regularly. At that point, however, approximately six regular employees with greater seniority than Claimant were laid off and placed on the "extra list," dropping Claimant's seniority ranking to seventh. Because he believed that he would no longer be called upon on a regular basis due to his diminished status, Claimant filed a claim for unemployment compensation benefits, which was denied ostensibly because he was not available for work, Section 401(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Act (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. ยง 801(d). The referee made the following pertinent findings in support of his conclusion:

5. During the period from July 27, 1975 through October 11, 1975 claimant only worked one shift even though a total of 50 shifts were available during said period for him to work based on his seniority.

6. Claimant was not available for telephone calls during the period from July 27, 1975 through October 11, 1975 even though the telephone calls were made to the number ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.