Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In re: Claim of Anthony Yannone, No. B-215388.
Richard A. Cairo, for petitioner.
Michael D. Alsher, Associate Counsel, with him, Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Craig, Doyle and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 81 Pa. Commw. Page 573]
In this voluntary quit case,*fn1 Anthony Yannone, a former store manager demoted to mechanic by Midas Muffler, appeals from a denial of benefits by the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review.
Where, as here, the party with the burden of proof did not prevail below, we must decide if the board capriciously disregarded evidence or committed an error of law by finding that Mr. Yannone, after being relieved as a manager, accepted a new position and then quit without meeting his evidentiary burden of proving necessitous and compelling cause.*fn2
Mr. Yannone worked for Midas as a store manager in the company's York facility for approximately ten months. Before that, he had worked for Midas as a mechanic in Mechanicsburg.
On October 29, 1982, the company's owner and vice president, Duane Rausch, relieved Mr. Yannone of his managerial duties because of poor recordkeeping and excessively high telephone bills. The board also found that Mr. Rausch offered Mr. Yannone continuing
[ 81 Pa. Commw. Page 574]
employment as a mechanic in Mechanicsburg, with a cut in salary of approximately $50 per week and that Mr. Yannone, considering this a fair offer, accepted the position. However, he never reported to work in the new job.
At the hearing, Mr. Yannone asserted that he did not report to Mechanicsburg on the advice of Midas' general manager, Ernest Natal, who allegedly told him that, if he took the job, Mr. Rausch would "make things rough for him." The board, however, found that the general manager neither made that statement nor gave Mr. Yannone that advice.
On appeal, Mr. Yannone contends that he never accepted the offer of a transfer to Mechanicsburg and that the new job did not constitute suitable work under Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Franklin & ...