Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of George S. Haines, No. B-186853.
Richard L. Orwig, with him William W. Runyeon, Edelman, Malsnee & Orwig, for petitioner.
Joel G. Cavicchia, Associate Counsel, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General for respondent.
Judges Mencer, Craig and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 60 Pa. Commw. Page 540]
The claimant questions the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's affirmance of a referee's decision which denied compensation on the basis of the willful misconduct provision of the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1
The referee found that on March 31, 1980, the employer*fn2 discharged claimant from his security guard position because, on the previous day, he was intoxicated at work. Here the claimant contends that the record is devoid of substantial competent evidence to support the board's finding.*fn3 We cannot agree.
The testimony of the claimant's supervisor found credible by the referee is alone sufficient to support the findings of the referee.*fn4
[ 60 Pa. Commw. Page 541]
The claimant admitted that he had been warned about working while under the influence of alcohol. This court has consistently held that an employee who reports to work in an intoxicated condition or drinks intoxicating liquor while on the job is guilty of willful misconduct. Robinson v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 51 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 72, 414 A.2d 143 (1980).
Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the board.
And Now, July 15, 1981, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. ...