Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

VICTOR A. MACARELLA v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (11/23/84)

decided: November 23, 1984.

VICTOR A. MACARELLA, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Victor A. Macarella, No. B-206624.

COUNSEL

W. E. Buchko, for petitioner.

Michael D. Alsher, Associate Counsel, with him, Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Judges Williams, Jr., Doyle and Barry, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Williams, Jr.

Author: Williams

[ 86 Pa. Commw. Page 177]

Victor A. Macarella appeals from the decision and order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review determining him ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits pursuant to Section 402(b)(1) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1

The unchallenged findings of the compensation authorities and the undisputed aspects of the record indicate that Macarella was employed for approximately three years as a district manager for a dry cleaning business. By all accounts, Macarella's job was

[ 86 Pa. Commw. Page 178]

    demanding, requiring him to work seven days per week, 12-15 hours per day, with few, if any, vacations. Moreover, there was dissension between Macarella and the owner's wife -- who was a fellow employee -- over the wife's alleged attempts to undermine his authority and her repeated accusations that he was cheating the employer. It is also agreed that the claimant was under a doctor's care for hypoglycemia prior to his resignation on October 31, 1981. Finally, the parties agree that prior to quitting the job, Macarella did not request lighter work or a leave of absence; he had not been advised by his physician to quit the job and had no other immediate job prospects.

Where the parties diverge factually is with respect to two findings:

2. The claimant submitted his resignation effective October 31, 1981, alleging a general dissatisfaction with working conditions and deteriorating health as the reason for his departure from his employment.

3. The claimant did not inform his employer that he was quitting as the result of a health problem but told the employer he was terminating his employment to seek other work.

In response to these findings, Macarella contends that the record establishes several reasons for his resignation: the long hours; lack of days off; and the employer's wife's accusations and encroachments on his managerial authority. He contends that the record does not support ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.