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.

SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (05/06/87)

decided: May 6, 1987.

SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, 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 Ann Smokes, No. B-242908.

COUNSEL

Joseph F. Keener, General Counsel, with him, G. Roger Bowers and C. Neil Petersen, for petitioner.

Clifford F. Blaze, Deputy Chief Counsel, for respondent.

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

Author: Palladino

[ 106 Pa. Commw. Page 17]

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Petitioner) appeals from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board), which affirmed the referee's decision that the conduct for which Ann Smokes (Claimant) was discharged did not constitute willful misconduct under Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law*fn1 and that Claimant was eligible for benefits. We affirm.

Claimant was employed by Petitioner as a bus operator. On December 31, 1984, Claimant was involved in a chargeable*fn2 accident for which she received a five day suspension with a final warning.*fn3 She was involved in another accident on February 5, 1985 when the back end of the bus she was driving swerved into a parked car. Petitioner deemed this a chargeable accident and, on February 13, 1985, discharged Claimant for violating

[ 106 Pa. Commw. Page 18]

    company policy. The referee made the following pertinent findings of fact:

7. The accident [on February 5, 1985] occurred with a parked car after the claimant had brought the vehicle to a complete stop. Due to inclement weather, the backend of the vehicle swerved and hit the parked car.

8. The claimant was not negligent in the operation of the vehicle.

9. The claimant performed her job duties to the best of her ability.

Based on these findings, the referee concluded Claimant's conduct did not "rise to the level of willful misconduct" and, therefore, Claimant was eligible 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.