Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Helen L. Barger, et al., No. B-156950.
Jerome H. Gerber, with him James L. Cowden, and Handler, Gerber and Weinstock, for petitioners.
David R. Confer, Assistant Attorney General, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and Edward G. Biester, Jr., Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Wilkinson, Jr. and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 46 Pa. Commw. Page 503]
Claimant Helen Barger, last employed by W.A. Moyer & Sons, Inc., had been laid off indefinitely on July 29, 1977 because of a business slowdown.
During the layoff the contract between claimant's union and the employer expired. On September 1, 1977, with no agreement on a new contract, a work stoppage occurred at the employer's place of business.
[ 46 Pa. Commw. Page 504]
Although operations continued, members of claimant's union were not willing to continue work under pre-existing contract terms. Claimant then engaged in some of the picketing at the employer's premises.
Claimant appeals from the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's determination that she is ineligible for benefits under the provisions of Section 402(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law,*fn1 which disqualifies employees from receiving benefits when their unemployment is due to a work stoppage which exists because of a labor dispute other than a lockout.
Claimant submits that the board erred as a matter of law in applying Section 402(d), claiming that her unemployment was due to her having been indefinitely laid off before the work stoppage occurred. We agree with claimant.
Section 402(d) provides in pertinent part, that:
An employee shall be ineligible for compensation ...