Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Robert Webb, No. B-184790.
O. Randolph Bragg, with him Sally F. O'Brien, for petitioner.
Richard C. Lengler, Law Student Intern, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Rogers, Blatt and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three.
[ 61 Pa. Commw. Page 586]
Memorandum Opinion and Order
After one week on the job as a chicken cutter, the claimant in this unemployment compensation case quit his work. He testified at the referee's hearing on his claim for unemployment compensation that his hands became swollen and painful as a result of the handling of cold chicken carcasses. He did not, however, consult a physician and his employer, to whom he said he exhibited his ailing hands, did not testify. One of the requirements imposed upon a claimant who voluntarily quits and assigns health reasons as the cause is that of showing by competent testimony that at the time of the termination adequate health reasons existed to justify termination. Deiss v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 475 Pa. 547, 381 A.2d 132 (1977). In Deiss, the court repeated with approval language from Superior Court cases to the effect that where the claimant does not consult a physician his unsupported
[ 61 Pa. Commw. Page 587]
statement that the work adversely affects his health is insufficient in itself to establish good cause for leaving. Id. 475 Pa. at 555, 381 A.2d at 136. This claimant did not consult a physician and his unsupported statement is insufficient to establish good cause.
And Now, this 16th day of September, 1981, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review dated ...