L v. Rossi v. UCBR
869 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Dec 15, 2017Background
- Rossi, a teacher employed since 2005, took paid medical leave for depression, anxiety, and high blood pressure during 2012–2013; his paid leave was to expire March 11, 2013.
- Employer offered options before the leave ended: return to work, resign, negotiate a separation agreement, or take an unpaid leave while preserving his position; an Income Protection Plan (two‑thirds pay) was available for separation or unpaid leave.
- Rossi requested a medical sabbatical (which would have provided half pay and full benefits) but was denied because he did not meet statutory eligibility (five years of satisfactory ratings).
- Rossi did not request an unpaid leave or sign a separation agreement, failed to attend the June 3, 2013 School Board meeting where his employment would be addressed, and was later notified his employment was terminated effective March 12, 2013.
- Rossi applied for unemployment benefits; after administrative proceedings and remand, the Board found he voluntarily quit and was ineligible for benefits; the Commonwealth Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rossi voluntarily quit or was terminated | Rossi: denial of medical sabbatical made him terminated as of March 12, 2013 (retroactive letter), so he was discharged and eligible for benefits | Employer: Rossi failed to accept offered accommodations (unpaid leave, income protection, separation) and did not preserve employment, showing voluntary quit | Court held Rossi voluntarily left employment; Board’s credibility findings upheld and benefits denied |
| Whether Rossi had a necessitous and compelling reason to quit | Rossi: his medical condition made it reasonable to seek a medical sabbatical and he acted to preserve employment | Employer: Rossi made no reasonable effort to preserve employment and did not pursue offered options or attend the Board meeting | Court held Rossi failed to prove necessitous and compelling reason because he did not make required efforts to preserve employment |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 780 A.2d 885 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001) (voluntary leaving renders claimant ineligible)
- Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 648 A.2d 124 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1994) (claimant bears burden to prove separation was discharge rather than voluntary quit)
- Greenray Industries v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 135 A.3d 1140 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (elements required to show necessitous and compelling reason)
- Hessou v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 942 A.2d 194 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (Board is ultimate factfinder; credibility determinations binding on appeal)
- Leon E. Wintermyer Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Marlowe), 812 A.2d 478 (Pa. 2002) (credibility findings will not be disturbed absent caprice)