Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Delores Kelly, No. B-174163.
William F. Bradican, for petitioner.
William J. Kennedy, Assistant Attorney General, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and Harvey Bartle, III, Acting Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Wilkinson, Jr., Williams, Jr. and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Wilkinson, Jr.
[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 263]
Petitioner (claimant) appeals from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying benefits because of willful misconduct, pursuant to Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(e). We affirm.
[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 264]
The findings of fact, implicitly adopted by the Board's affirmance of the referee's decision, are supported by substantial evidence in the record and thus are binding on this Court. See McKeever v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 51 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 147, 413 A.2d 795 (1980). Quoted in full, they read:
1. The claimant was last employed by St. Joseph's Hospital for one year as a Licensed Practical Nurse at a final rate of $4.35 an hour. Her last day of work was December 22, 1978.
2. The claimant was discharged because she did not report for work on the 3:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. shift on Sunday, December 24, 1978.
3. Enclosed with a paycheck which the claimant received on Friday, December 22, 1978 was a written communication from the employer informing the claimant that she would be terminated if she did not comply with hospital policy and report for work as scheduled during the holiday season.
4. The claimant did not wish to work on December 24, 1978 because of a prearranged family celebration.
In determining whether an employee's refusal of an employer's work assignment constitutes willful misconduct, we must balance the reasonableness of the request with the reasonableness of the refusal. Reed v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 51 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 231, 414 A.2d 172 (1980); Hughes v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 40 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 638, 398 A.2d 236 (1979). The employer here is a hospital running 24 hours a day. A witness ...