Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the case of In Re: Lawrence W. Richards, No. B-217309.
G. Scott Gardner, for petitioner.
Michael Alsher, Associate Counsel, with him, Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Rogers, MacPhail and Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Barbieri.
Lawrence R. Richards, (Claimant), appeals here from an order of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) reversing a referee's decision and declaring Claimant ineligible for benefits under the provisions of Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law).*fn1
There is no dispute as to the facts. Claimant, while receiving benefits for a layoff from his employment at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, was discharged from a part-time job with Domino's Pizza where his weekly earnings were less than his "partial benefit credit" of $70.00 per week. His discharge from Domino's Pizza was for willful misconduct.
Claimant, without seeking to contest the Board's findings concerning the willful misconduct discharge by Domino's Pizza, but citing our holding in Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Fabric, 24 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 238, 354 A.2d 905 (1976), contends that with his part-time job paying less than his "partial benefit credit" it was clear error to disallow his weekly compensation benefits since his part-time
work could have no effect on his entitlement to regular benefits and, therefore, under Fabric, his loss of the employment with Domino's Pizza is irrelevant. We agree.
In Fabric, where there was part-time employment with earnings less than the partial benefit credit, as here, we stated the test for disallowance or deduction of regular benefits to be as follows:
In other words, the part-time job must have yielded income in excess of the partial benefit credit (and thus decreased the amount of the weekly benefits payable) before a claimant can be denied any benefits because of a voluntary separation. Under the statutory definition, a claimant is only "unemployed" due to his voluntary separation to the extent of the wages he was earning; and we see no ...