M. McGinnis v. UCBR
155 C.D. 2017
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Sep 11, 2017Background
- McGinnis filed for unemployment in June 2016, claiming unemployment based on a layoff from ABC Transit (school van driver) for the summer.
- He previously worked 30 years for the U.S. Postal Service and retired effective early–mid February 2016; Postal Service later challenged benefits claiming he voluntarily quit to retire.
- McGinnis received benefits for weeks ending June 18–Aug. 27, 2016; Department sent questionnaires and an Advance Notice, and a Claim Record listed the Postal Service as a separating employer with reason code “lack of work.”
- The Claims Transcript recorded only ABC Transit as the separating employer with lack of work; it also recorded McGinnis’s federal employment and that he would receive a pension.
- A Referee and the Board found McGinnis voluntarily retired from the Postal Service and imposed a fault overpayment, concluding he knowingly misrepresented his reason for separation.
- The Commonwealth Court reversed the fault finding, holding the record lacks substantial evidence that McGinnis intentionally reported the Postal Service separation as a layoff; overpayment must be treated as nonfault.
Issues
| Issue | McGinnis's Argument | Board/Department's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is substantial evidence to support a fault overpayment for intentional misrepresentation of reason for separation | McGinnis contends he sought benefits for ABC Transit and never intentionally reported the Postal Service separation as a layoff; any inconsistency was confusion or error by UC representative | The Board asserts McGinnis reported the Postal Service separation as lack of work and his denial was not credible, supporting a finding of intentional misrepresentation (fault) | Reversed: record lacks substantial evidence that McGinnis intentionally misreported; overpayment is nonfault and subject to recoupment under Section 804(b)(1) |
Key Cases Cited
- Daniels v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 309 A.2d 738 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1973) (defines “fault” as more than a voluntary act)
- Greenawalt v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 543 A.2d 209 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1988) (Board must make findings about claimant’s state of mind to find fault)
- Brown v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 854 A.2d 626 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (substantial evidence defined as what a reasonable mind might accept)
- Chishko v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 934 A.2d 172 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (fault encompasses blameworthy conduct)
- Fugh v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 153 A.3d 1169 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017) (fault includes knowing recklessness or gross negligence; mere mistake/confusion insufficient)
- Republic Steel Corp. v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (Shinsky), 421 A.2d 1060 (Pa. 1980) (review of substantial evidence requires whole-record review)
- Chester Cmty. Charter Sch. v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 138 A.3d 50 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (Board is ultimate factfinder; credibility determinations entitled to deference when supported by substantial evidence)