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.

Greer v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

July 29, 2010

KELVIN X. GREER, PETITIONER
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Brobson

Argued: June 24, 2010

BEFORE: HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, Judge, HONORABLE P. KEVIN BROBSON, Judge, HONORABLE PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge.

OPINION

Petitioner Kelvin X. Greer (Claimant) petitions for review of a decision and order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board), dated August 24, 2009. The Board reversed the decision of a Referee and declared Claimant ineligible for benefits under Section 402(e.1) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law).*fn1 We affirm the Board's order.

The facts, as found by the Board, are as follows:

1. The claimant was last employed as a Machinist by Lehigh Heavy Forge Corporation [(Employer)*fn2 ] from June of 2001, at a final pay rate of $17.35 per hour. His last day of work was October 31, 2008.

2. The employer's rules state that, "Possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages on plant premises, or reporting to work under the influence of alcohol, and under the influence of drugs, and/or narcotics, or in possession of dangerous drugs and narcotics while on plant premises, or reporting to working under the influence of drugs and/or arranging to buy or sell drugs while on company property, and/or conviction of drug-related crime (Employer's 1) are prohibited."

3. The employer's further explanation of the drug and alcohol policy statement also states that, "Employees suspected of being under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, be tested for blood levels of drugs and alcohol."

4. The claimant was or should have been aware of this policy as it was publicly posted in the workplace.

5. On October 30, 2008, the employer smelled the odor of alcohol in the claimant's presence.

6. The employer requested that the claimant be tested.

7. The claimant agreed to be tested and was taken to St. Luke's Hospital North.

8. The claimant was given a blood/alcohol test and a drug test.

9. The blood/alcohol test came back negative. 10. The drug test, however, came ...


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.