Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, in case of In Re: Claim of Bruce E. Shaw, No. B-256172.
David L. Hill, Community Legal Services, Inc., for petitioner.
Sandra L. Clouser, Assistant Counsel, with her, Clifford F. Blaze, Deputy Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Craig, MacPhail, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 115 Pa. Commw. Page 62]
Claimant Bruce E. Shaw appeals from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review denying
[ 115 Pa. Commw. Page 63]
his claim for benefits. Specifically, the board found the claimant ineligible for unemployment compensation because his dismissal was the result of willful misconduct.*fn1
The claimant raises three issues:
1. SEPTA's urine test policy and its application in this case violated the claimant's fourth amendment rights because SEPTA did not have a reasonable suspicion of drug abuse by the claimant.
2. The board erred in concluding that claimant had engaged in willful misconduct because the claimant had smoked the marijuana while off duty, and therefore did not violate SEPTA rule 85-1.
3. The board erred in concluding that the claimant did not have good cause for refusing to undergo drug treatment.
Because we conclude that SEPTA did have reasonable suspicion of possible drug abuse by the claimant, that the claimant did engage in willful misconduct, and that the claimant did not have good cause for failing to ...