Appeal from the Order of the Employer Accounts Review Board, in case of Emil Vallecillo, Claimant, Lincoln Borough, Employer, Account No. 81-2472M, dated August 27, 1984.
Marianna E. Specter, with her, Stephen Israel, for petitioner.
Sean F. Creegan, Assistant Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Craig and MacPhail, and Senior Judge Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 98 Pa. Commw. Page 409]
Lincoln Borough (petitioner) appeals a decision of the Employer Accounts Review Board (Board) which determined that the petitioner was obligated to reimburse the Office of Employment Security for a portion of the benefits received by a part-time employee who had been laid off by another employer from his full-time work.
Emil Vallecillo (claimant) was hired as a part-time policeman by the petitioner in 1981, at which time he was also employed full-time by United States Steel (U.S. Steel). In 1982 U.S. Steel furloughed the claimant, who retained his part-time employment with the petitioner and who remains so employed. The claimant thereafter filed an application for unemployment compensation benefits which was granted, and he received a total of $6,257 in benefits between June 1983 and March 1984.
At all times relevant the petitioner was a "reimbursable employer" under Sections 1201 through 1204 of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Law (Law),*fn1 having filed an Election of Reimbursement form pursuant to the provisions of Section 1202.3 of the Law, 43 P.S. § 912.3. On that form, the petitioner agreed to pay an amount equal to the amount of benefits paid and charged to its account, as provided by Section 1202.2(a) of the Law, which pertinently provides:
[ 98 Pa. Commw. Page 410]
Any political subdivision of the Commonwealth . . . which . . . is or becomes liable to the contribution provisions of the [Law] may, in lieu of payment of such contributions, elect to pay to the department for the Unemployment Compensation Fund, an amount equal to the amount of . . . benefits . . . paid, . . . that is attributable to service in the employ of such political subdivision. . . .
The claimant had earned $10,445 during 1982, his base year,*fn2 of which 24% ($2,468) was earned in the petitioner's employ. The petitioner was correspondingly billed for $1,501.68 representing 24% of the $6,251 in benefits paid to the claimant. This was done pursuant to the provisions of Section 1108 of the Law, which provides in pertinent part:
If benefits paid to an individual are based on wages paid by more than one employer and one or more of such employers are liable for ...