D.L. Wetzel v. UCBR
1911 and 1912 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Jan 4, 2018Background
- Claimant David L. Wetzel was laid off December 6, 2013, from Baldwin Hardware due to plant closure and was eligible for Trade Readjustment Allowance (TRA) and state unemployment compensation (UC).
- Claimant received 26 weeks of UC (Feb 15–Aug 8, 2014) and subsequently received 26 weeks of TRA (Aug 30, 2014–Feb 21, 2015); he later filed for an additional TRA week (claim week ending Feb 28, 2015).
- L&I determined Claimant ineligible for the Feb 28, 2015 TRA week under 19 U.S.C. § 2293(a)(1) because TRA entitlement (52 weeks) is reduced by weeks of UC received, leaving no remaining TRA weeks.
- L&I also issued a non-fault overpayment determination of $3,817 in UC benefits (later reduced to $537 by an apparent offset against TRA weeks), asserting the overpayment could be recouped under 43 P.S. § 874(b)(1)(iii)(C).
- The Referee and Board affirmed both the TRA denial and the offset/overpayment determination; Claimant appealed both determinations to this Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Claimant was entitled to the TRA week ending Feb 28, 2015 | Wetzel implicitly argued entitlement (but did not brief the point) | L&I/Board: TRA entitlement reduced by prior UC weeks under 19 U.S.C. § 2293(a)(1) | Court affirmed: Claimant exhausted TRA (26 UC + 26 TRA) and is ineligible for the Feb 28, 2015 week |
| Whether a non-fault UC overpayment may be offset by TRA benefits | Wetzel argued no overpayment should be recouped from him because it was not his fault | L&I/Board: Offset overpayment by available TRA eligibility, reducing overpayment to $537 | Court reversed and remanded: statute allows recoupment only from future UC benefits; TRA cannot be used to offset unless Board proves TRA weeks were in fact applied, so Board must determine whether TRA was actually used as an offset and, if so, restore any wrongly withheld TRA |
Key Cases Cited
- Bushofsky v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 626 A.2d 687 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (state UC bureaus administer TRA eligibility)
- Burley v. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 773 A.2d 230 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (benefit statute specificity: offsets allowed only where statute expressly provides)
- Latella v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 459 A.2d 464 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1983) (statutory construction: express designation implies exclusion of omissions)
- Key v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 687 A.2d 409 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996) (substantial evidence standard for Board factual findings)
- Rapid Pallet v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 707 A.2d 636 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) (standards for striking briefs/dismissing appeals for failure to brief issues)