Wise v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
111 A.3d 1256
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2015Background
- Claimant worked for Kindred Place as an on-call PRN aide (Oct 2011), was promoted to a full‑time home health aide position (Apr 2013) conditioned on obtaining CNA certification within 90 days.
- Claimant injured her back on July 31, 2013; returned to light‑duty work consistent with physician restrictions, later restricted to sedentary work.
- Employer informed Claimant on Oct 10, 2013 that, because she had not obtained CNA certification, she would be returned to her prior PRN (on‑call) classification; Employer offered a sedentary desk PRN position as an accommodation.
- Claimant declined to sign a reclassification document, did not respond within the 24‑hour period Employer requested, and left a voicemail on Oct 15 asking Employer to fax paperwork to her attorney and to stop harassing her. Employer then ceased contact.
- The UC Service Center and Referee found Claimant voluntarily resigned; the Referee and Board credited Employer’s witnesses, concluding Claimant quit without a necessitous and compelling reason and was therefore ineligible for benefits under 43 P.S. § 802(b).
- The court affirmed the Board, holding the demotion was justified by Claimant’s failure to obtain required CNA certification and that an offered sedentary PRN position defeated her claim of compelling health‑based cause to quit.
Issues
| Issue | Claimant's Argument | Employer's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Board’s factual findings are supported by substantial evidence | Board ignored Claimant’s testimony and documents; findings not supported | Credited Employer witnesses; Board resolved conflicts for Employer | Board’s factual findings are supported by substantial evidence and binding on appeal |
| Whether separation was a discharge or voluntary resignation | Claimant says she was discharged | Employer says she failed to accept the offered reclassification within the time given, implying resignation | Court held Claimant voluntarily resigned; conduct showed intent to leave |
| Whether Claimant quit for necessitous and compelling health reasons | Claimant contends injury and inability to perform justified quitting | Employer offered a sedentary desk job that met medical restrictions | Court held Claimant failed to prove compelling health reason; accommodation was offered |
| Whether unilateral change (demotion) justified quitting | Claimant argues reclassification and loss of benefits were substantial unilateral changes | Employer argues demotion was justified by Claimant’s failure to secure required CNA certification | Court held demotion was justified and refusal to accept justified demotion does not establish necessitous and compelling cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Taylor v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 378 A.2d 829 (Pa. 1977) (defines "necessitous and compelling" standard for quitting)
- Allegheny Valley Sch. v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 697 A.2d 243 (Pa. 1997) (justified demotion caused by claimant’s fault precludes necessitous and compelling claim)
- Wintermyer v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Bd., 812 A.2d 478 (Pa. 2002) (appellate review for capricious disregard of evidence standard)
- Lee Hosp. v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 637 A.2d 695 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1994) (requirements to prove health‑related compelling cause to quit)
- Ductmate Indus., Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review, 949 A.2d 338 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2008) (Board as ultimate factfinder; substantial evidence standard)