C.A. Cartagena, Jr. v. UCBR, C.A. Cartagena, Jr. v. UCBR

Claimant Carlos A. Cartagena, Jr. worked as a Database Administrator/Program Evaluator for Public Health Management Corporation and stopped working on December 14, 2015.
Claimant met with HR in late 2015 expressing unhappiness and requested a severance agreement rather than workplace accommodations; employer drafted and offered severance (six weeks pay) but Claimant sought more (six months).
HR testified she told Claimant he could leave and they would prepare the agreement; Claimant did not sign the final agreement by the deadline and did not return to work.
Claimant contended at hearing that he was terminated on December 14, 2015; employer maintained he voluntarily left when continued work was available.
The Unemployment Compensation Referee and the Board found Claimant voluntarily quit without a necessitous and compelling reason and denied benefits under 43 P.S. § 802(b), also finding fault overpayments; Claimant appealed to this Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the separation was a discharge (§402(e)) or a voluntary quit (§402(b))	Cartagena: He was terminated on Dec. 14, 2015 and thus should be analyzed as a discharge	Board/Employer: He voluntarily left to pursue a severance; employer did not use language of firing and work remained available	Court: No error in treating it as a voluntary quit; substantial evidence supports that Claimant initiated separation
Whether Claimant had a necessitous and compelling reason to quit (§402(b))	Cartagena: Alleged hostile work environment and sick child justified resignation (raised on appeal)	Employer: Claimant declined offers to continue work or mediation and chose to seek severance instead	Court: Issues not preserved at hearing; on record, Claimant failed to prove necessitous and compelling cause; benefits properly denied

Fitzgerald v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 714 A.2d 1126 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) (procedural note on agency decision review)
Brunswick Hotel & Conference Ctr., LLC v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 906 A.2d 657 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (standard for reviewing necessitous and compelling cause)
Procito v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 945 A.2d 261 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (elements required to prove necessitous and compelling cause)
Dehus v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 545 A.2d 434 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1988) (issue preservation before the referee required)
Key v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 687 A.2d 409 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996) (distinguishing discharge from voluntary quit and burdens of proof)
Empire Intimates v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 655 A.2d 662 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (burden on claimant to prove necessitous and compelling reasons if no discharge found)
Spadaro v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 850 A.2d 855 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (conscious intention required for voluntary termination)
Charles v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 552 A.2d 727 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1989) (employer language must show immediacy and finality to constitute a discharge)