A. Easton v. UCBR
1994 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Sep 8, 2017Background
- Claimant Anthony Easton worked as an assistant brewer for Victory Brewing Co. and was discharged June 16, 2016 for habitual tardiness.
- Employer had an attendance policy and provided written and oral warnings placing Claimant on probation for repeated lateness.
- Claimant filed for unemployment benefits; initial UC hearing was scheduled for August 16, 2016, but Claimant did not attend. Employer presented testimony and records at that hearing.
- Referee found Claimant habitually tardy, including being ~2 hours late on June 15, 2016 (overslept), and concluded this was willful misconduct under Section 402(e).
- Claimant appealed, alleging he did not receive the first hearing notice and asserting lateness was due to his or his children’s illnesses. Board remanded for a remand hearing to consider excuse for nonappearance and new evidence conditional on proving proper cause for missing the first hearing.
- Board found Claimant failed to establish proper cause for missing the initial hearing, discredited his testimony about not receiving the notice, declined to consider his merits testimony from the remand, and affirmed denial of benefits. Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Claimant’s termination for habitual tardiness constitutes willful misconduct under 43 P.S. §802(e) | Easton: absences/tardiness were due to his or his children’s illnesses and thus justified | Employer: repeated warnings and continued lateness after probation show willful misconduct | Held: Habitual tardiness after warnings is willful misconduct; disqualification affirmed |
| Whether Board erred by relying on evidence from hearing held in Claimant’s absence | Easton: initially did not receive notice of hearing, so evidence against him is unreliable | Employer: hearing notice was mailed to correct address and was not returned; hearing properly proceeded | Held: Board found notice properly mailed, discredited Claimant’s excuse, and properly relied on the hearing record |
| Whether Claimant established proper cause for missing first hearing so remand evidence should be considered | Easton: claimed he didn’t receive notice (mail lost, family collected mail) | Employer: proof notice mailed to correct address; no return; Claimant received other mailed notices | Held: Claimant failed to show proper cause; Board properly excluded merits evidence from remand |
| Whether employer met burden to establish prima facie willful misconduct and shift burden to Claimant | Easton: performance otherwise adequate; tardiness excused by illness | Employer: presented testimonial and documentary evidence of warnings and repeated tardiness | Held: Employer met prima facie case; burden shifted and Claimant failed to rebut with evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Kelly v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 747 A.2d 436 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) (standard for willful misconduct and burden-shifting)
- American Process Lettering, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 412 A.2d 1123 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1980) (habitual tardiness can constitute willful misconduct)
- Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Glenn, 350 A.2d 890 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1976) (termination after warnings for lateness supports willful misconduct finding)
- Seton Company v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 663 A.2d 296 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (scope of appellate review and standards)