Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Eileen S. Crenshaw, No. B-167404.
Jerome Balter, for appellant.
John T. Kupchinsky, Assistant Attorney General, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel and Edward G. Biester, Jr., Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Blatt, MacPhail and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail. President Judge Bowman did not participate in the decision in this case. Judge Williams, Jr. concurs in result only.
[ 50 Pa. Commw. Page 137]
Eileen Crenshaw (Claimant) was last associated with the University of Pennsylvania (University) as an industrial hygiene consultant on June 30, 1978.
[ 50 Pa. Commw. Page 138]
Following written notification that she was being relieved of her duties as a consultant, she applied for unemployment compensation benefits. The Bureau (now Office) of Employment Security (Bureau) denied benefits on the basis that she was self-employed and, therefore, ineligible for benefits pursuant to Section 402(h) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess. P.L.  2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(h). Upon appeal and after hearing, the referee affirmed the Bureau's determination on the basis of Section 402(h). The referee did not address Claimant's alternative argument that even if she were self-employed during her association with the University, she was eligible for benefits pursuant to Section 401(f) of the Law, 43 P.S. § 801(f).*fn1 Upon further appeal, the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) affirmed the referee's decision on the basis of Section 402(h) and held Section 401(f) to be inapplicable to this case.
Claimant appeals to us from the Board's order and raises two issues: whether the Board's determination
[ 50 Pa. Commw. Page 139]
that she was self-employed was supported by substantial evidence and whether, even if she had been self-employed, she nevertheless is eligible for unemployment compensation benefits pursuant to Section 401(f). For the reasons which follow, we reverse the order of the Board and remand this case for a computation of benefits.
Section 4(1) of the Law, 43 P.S. § 753(1) defines "Employment" as
(1) . . . all personal service performed for remuneration by an individual under any contract of hire, express or ...