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.

ROOSEVELT ANTHONY v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (03/18/86)

decided: March 18, 1986.

ROOSEVELT ANTHONY, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the case of In Re: Claim of Roosevelt Anthony, No. B-234463.

COUNSEL

Robert Senville, for petitioner.

Richard Faux, Associate Counsel, with him, James K. Bradley, Associate Counsel, and Charles G. Hasson, Acting Deputy Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Judges Craig and Palladino, and Senior Judge Kalish, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 96 Pa. Commw. Page 21]

Roosevelt Anthony appeals from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review which denied his request for benefits. The board affirmed the referee's decision that Anthony was ineligible for benefits because of willful misconduct.*fn1 We vacate and remand.

Swift & Company employed Anthony as a laborer for eight years and his last day of work was on June 19,

[ 96 Pa. Commw. Page 221984]

. Swift closed its plant for vacation purposes during the week of July 1 and reopened on July 9, 1984. Because of his seniority, Anthony was entitled to three weeks of paid vacation, including one week that Swift had paid to him earlier. On his last day of work, Anthony received his remaining two weeks of vacation pay and assumed that he was entitled to take a second week off even though the plant was scheduled to reopen on July 9. Anthony failed to report for work on July 9, 10 and 11, 1984. When Anthony contacted Swift, Swift terminated him because of his three-day unauthorized absence. The referee found that Swift did not authorize Anthony to be absent a second week, and that Anthony did not follow Swift's policy regarding vacation scheduling.

Anthony applied for benefits at the Reading branch of the Office of Employment Security (OES). In its statement on form UC-45A, regarding Anthony's dismissal, the employer checked the block marked "voluntary quit" and explained that Anthony "abandoned his position for three (3) consecutive days and did not call in or report off." The OES issued its decision on a "NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (Voluntary Quit)" form, stating that Anthony

     last worked with Swift & Co. on 06/28/84 and:

Left this employment voluntarily without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature because following a one week vacation shutdown you failed to report for ...


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.