Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Joseph Kemper, No. B-197000.
William D. Kemper, Dillon, McCandless, King & Kemper, for petitioner.
Steven J. Neary, Associate Counsel, with him Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Blatt, Craig and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 70 Pa. Commw. Page 208]
Claimant Joseph Kemper appeals from a July 9, 1981 order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review which affirmed the referee's decision to deny benefits on the ground of willful misconduct under the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1
The claimant was employed as a burglar alarm installer by Masterguard from May 27, 1980 to April 6, 1981. However, acting outside of that employment, the claimant installed a burglar alarm system in his brother-in-law's home in late March or early April 1981. On April 6, 1981, the employer discharged the claimant because of a policy of the employer prohibiting employees from installing alarm systems on their own.
The board adopted a finding of the referee that the employer had such a policy, and that the claimant was aware, or should have been aware, of the policy. Those findings are supported by testimony of the employer's representative at the hearing; although that testimony -- flatly contradicted by employees -- could not be characterized as clear-cut or strong,*fn2 we cannot conclude that it was insubstantial.
[ 70 Pa. Commw. Page 209]
Questions of credibility are for the board, and its findings will not be disturbed because the claimant presented conflicting testimony. Rabinowitz v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 15 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 51, 324 A.2d 825 (1974).*fn3
Therefore, the order of the board is affirmed.