Appeal from the Order of the State Civil Service Commission in case of Mary F. McLaughlin v. Philadelphia County Board of Assistance, Department of Public Welfare, Appeal No. 2499.
Neal Goldstein, Gafni & Goldstein, for petitioner.
Frederic Weinstein, with him Joseph F. Strain and James S. Marshall, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
Judges Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail.
[ 51 Pa. Commw. Page 365]
Mary F. McLaughlin (Petitioner) has appealed from the adjudication of the State Civil Service Commission (Commission), which sustained Petitioner's removal from her position as Clerk 2 with the Philadelphia County Board of Assistance, Department of Public Welfare (DPW).
Petitioner was terminated, effective June 27, 1978, for an unexcused absence on June 2, 1978. It is undisputed that Petitioner absented herself from work to attend the funeral of her brother-in-law.
The issues presented for our review are (1) whether the notice of the charges against Petitioner meets the requirements of due process and (2) whether the Commission's findings are based on substantial evidence.
Petitioner argues that the Commission admitted evidence of her employment record and past disciplinary action taken against her by DPW, that the Commission
[ 51 Pa. Commw. Page 366]
based its findings, in part, upon such evidence, and that, therefore, the termination notice she had received on June 26, 1978 had not adequately advised her of the charges against her.
It is well settled that the notice required by Section 950 of the Civil Service Act*fn1 prior to termination of a regular status employee must give reasonable notice of the charges against such employee so that he or she will have sufficient opportunity to answer those charges. Chavis v. Philadelphia County Board of Assistance, 29 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 205, 370 A.2d 445 (1977).
Here, the notice provided to Petitioner stated: "[U]nexcused absence: Being absent from work on June 2, 1978 without adequate ...