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.

RICHARD GRZECH (TOKEN) v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (01/06/81)

decided: January 6, 1981.

RICHARD GRZECH (TOKEN), PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT. BELOIT-MANHATTAN, INC., INTERVENOR



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the case of In Re: Claim of Richard Grzech (Token), No. B-173499.

COUNSEL

Thomas W. Jennings, with him Jeffery S. Orchinik, for petitioner.

Warren M. Laddon, with him William J. Flannery, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, for intervenor.

Judges Craig, MacPhail and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail.

Author: Macphail

[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 10]

Richard Grzech (Petitioner) appeals to this Court from an order of the Unemployment Compensation

[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 11]

Board of Review (Board) dated June 22, 1979, denying him unemployment compensation benefits (Benefits). The Board affirmed the referee's determination that his unemployment was due to a strike and that Petitioner was ineligible for Benefits under the provisions of Section 402(d) of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1

Petitioner is one of forty individuals employed by Beloit Manhattan Co., Inc. (Employer) and represented for purposes of collective bargaining by Local 1971, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (Union). The Employer and the Union had previously entered a labor-management agreement from August 13, 1976 to August 12, 1978.

After a series of negotiating sessions, the Employer submitted a "final offer" to the Union on Friday, August 11, 1978. The Union representative immediately asked the Employer if it would be amenable, in the event the union members rejected this final offer, to permitting the production workers to work under the conditions of the existing collective bargaining Agreement (Agreement) until a new Agreement was reached. The Employer refused. Despite the refusal, the Union sent a mailgram, after the session concluded, to the Employer reiterating its offer. On Saturday, August 12, 1978, the day the Agreement expired, the union members voted to reject the Employer's final offer. No strike vote was taken at this time.

[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 12]

On Monday, August 14, 1978, the next scheduled working day after the Agreement expired, the Petitioner and other employees were permitted to work the entire first shift. During the course of the first shift, the second shift union steward attempted to gain access to the Employer's premises to check the status of the collective bargaining negotiations with the Petitioner, the chief union steward. The Employer denied access. This denial was reported to the Union's business representative. At 3:30 P.M., August 14, 1978, the Union sent the Employer a mailgram advising it that the Union interpreted the Employer's refusal to accept the Union's offer on August 11, 1978 and failure to answer the mailgram containing the same offer as a lockout. The Union members voted to strike and the second shift employees did not report to work.

On Tuesday, August 15, 1978, the Employer sent a telegram to the Union accepting the Union offer. The Union did not respond to the ...


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.