Wright-Swygert v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
16 A.3d 1204
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2011Background
- Claimant Deborah L. Wright-Swygert voluntarily left employment with Independence Blue Cross by accepting a VERP during a company downsizing and restructuring.
- Employer offered VERP; Claimant was given 45 days to decide and initially declined, citing job security and enjoyment of her work.
- Two meetings occurred where a Director indicated the division would be affected and her job might be eliminated, pressuring consideration of VERP.
- Referee denied benefits, finding no necessitous and compelling reason because there was no specific threat to her job and fears were speculative.
- Board affirmed the Referee; Claimant appealed, arguing the surrounding circumstances showed a likelihood of layoff and compelling necessity to quit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether downsizing pressure created a necessitous and compelling reason | Wright-Swygert contends the two single-person discussions and general shakeup signal imminent layoff. | Board argues speculation about future job loss does not constitute necessitous and compelling cause. | Yes; circumstances supported necessitous and compelling cause, leading to reversal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Renda v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 837 A.2d 685 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (assessing whether fear of employment loss is well-founded in downsizing cases)
- Staub v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 673 A.2d 434 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996) (speculation about employer's financial condition does not alone establish cause)
- Frazier v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 833 A.2d 1181 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2003) (scope of review and standards in UCABR determinations)
- Architectural Testing, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 940 A.2d 1277 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2008) (hearsay and statements admitted for effect rather than truth)
- Dep't of Navy v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 168 Pa.Cmwlth. 356 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1994) (belief in job elimination can support necessitous & compelling claims when supported by facts)