69 Pa. Commw. 374 | Pa. Commw. Ct. | 1982
OPINION by
Baudilio Garcia (claimant) lias appealed from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying Mm benefits on the grounds that he had been discharged because of willful misconduct.
The record indicates that the claimant was discharged from his position as a .truck helper/driver for the Bethlehem Steel Corp. (employer) in early December of 1979. He was subsequently reinstated by the employer after union intervention and he entered into an agreement with the employer wherein he was put on notice that any further acts of absenteeism or unfitness to work would result in Ms discharge.
Where, as here, the party with the burden of proof
The claimant’s major contention is that the Board’s decision upholding the referee’s denial is not supported by .substantial evidence in that the bulk of
Willful misconduct is not defined in the Law, but decisions of this Court have delineated its scope. Kentucky Fried Chicken of Altoona, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 10 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 90, 309 A.2d 165 (1973). We have also held that failure of the claimant to report his absence, as required by the employer’s rules is willful misconduct. Donahue v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 42 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 139, 40 A.2d 251 (1979).
For all of the above-stated reasons,
Artd Now, this 14th day of October, 1982, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the above-eaptioned ease is hereby affirmed.
Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937 ) 2897, as amended,, 43 P.S. §802 (e).
The agreement provided: “That any further incidents of absenteeism, being unfit for work, fooling to report off from work, or being an undesirable employee will result in your immediate suspension with intent to discharge.” and “That you are placed on probation for a period of two (2) years." (emphasis added).
The burden of proof as to willful misconduct rests with the employer. Lee v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 57 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 480, 426 A.2d 757 (1981).
Inasmuch as we have resolved this matter in the Board’s favor on the willful misconduct issue, we need not address its argument concerning the applicability of the doctrine of res judicata.