Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in the case of Michael J. Wolfe v. Globe Security Systems, No. A-79176.
Thomas W. Murphy, with him Joseph J. Murphy and Robert J. Murphy, for petitioner.
Peter J. Weber, of counsel, Rawle & Henderson, for respondent, Globe Security Systems.
Judges Mencer, Rogers and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.
This is the appeal of Michael J. Wolfe from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board affirming a referee's denial of his claim for benefits.
At two hearings conducted by a referee Mr. Wolfe testified that he is a recipient of social security and is employed on a somewhat irregular schedule by Globe Security as a guard at the Budd Company plant located on Hunting Park Avenue in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Early in the morning of April 20, 1979, Mr. Wolfe received a telephone call from his superior at Globe Security and was told to report that morning at the Budd plant in order to perform guard duties. As was his custom, Mr. Wolfe then donned his security guard uniform and proceeded to work by means of a public bus. He disembarked from the bus at the intersection of Stokely Street and Hunting Park Avenue at 7:30 a.m. and purchased a newspaper from a coin-operated dispenser. As he began to cross Hunting Park Avenue he was struck by a bicyclist and caused to fall backwards landing on his lunch pail. He thereby sustained the injuries for which he here seeks compensation. At the moment of his injury, the claimant's destination was the guard headquarters located approximately one-half block from that point on the far side of Hunting Park Avenue where he would have been had he crossed the highway without incident. The claimant intended to report to work at the guard headquarters, sign in, and then receive his assignment of duties for the day.
On the basis of this testimony the referee, affirmed by the Board, made the following findings of fact:
1. That the Claimant is receiving social security benefits and in addition works staggered hours for the Defendant, Globe Security.
2. That the Claimant receives telephone calls at home from his supervisor, one Leiutenant [sic] Stutz, inquiring as to Claimant's availability to work as a security guard at the Budd Plant on certain days on a certain shift.
[ 65 Pa. Commw. Page 993]
. That when the Claimant indicates his availability for said work, he reports to the Guard Headquarters located on the Budd Company premises; Claimant, after signing in for ...