Appeal from the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, in the case of Michael Wade, No. B-266359.
Andrew J. Donaghy, Lord & Mulligan, for petitioner.
John E. Herzog, Assistant Counsel, with him, 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 Craig.
[ 124 Pa. Commw. Page 76]
Michael Wade appeals an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review that affirmed a referee's decision denying him benefits pursuant to section 402(e) of the Law, the willful misconduct disqualification.*fn1
Ellisco, Inc. employed Mr. Wade as a production worker from August 1978 until his discharge on October 2, 1987, for excessive unexcused absences. Effective January 1, 1987, Ellisco implemented an absenteeism policy
[ 124 Pa. Commw. Page 77]
that set forth procedures to be followed for unexcused and excused absences that stated:
Excused Absences are those absences approved by Management and supported by evidence such as a physicians report, mandatory court appearances or other absences approved by Management at its discretion. While these absences are generally excused, Management reserves the right to consider such absences unexcused in the event an employee is chronically or excessively absent. Prior to disciplinary action being taken, such employees will be counseled in an effort to improve their attendance record.
Unexcused Absences : Employees will be permitted a maximum of three (3) days in a calendar quarter before disciplinary action is taken. . . . An employee absent for a full day will be charged for one full day. Absences of four (4) hours or less will be charged for one-half (1/2) day and over four (4) hours for one full day. . . .
The Disciplinary Action procedure is ...