50 Pa. Commw. 42 | Pa. Commw. Ct. | 1980
Opinion by
Glenmore Academy (employer) appeals from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which granted benefits to the claimant.
The employer hired the claimant in September 1976 to teach pre-school classes. In February 1978, the employer’s representative informed the claimant that her work was unsatisfactory and her services were then terminated. Her initial application for benefits was denied by the then Bureau of Employ
It is axiomatic that it is the Board’s function to resolve conflicts in the evidence, and that we must affirm its decision if it is supported by substantial evidence. Santiago v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 43 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 276, 402 A.2d 300 (1979). A careful reading of the record here convinces us that there is ample evidence to support the referee’s conclusion that the claimant was discharged because she failed to meet the employer’s standards, and, because, as the referee also found, this failure was not due to her willful disregard of the employer’s interest but rather to mere inability or incapacity, on her part, he therefore properly concluded that the claimant was not guilty of willful misconduct. See Wetzel v. Unemployment Compensation
The order of the Board is therefore affirmed.
Order
And Now, this 11th day of March, 1980, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the above-captioned matter is hereby affirmed.
This decision was reached prior to the death of President Jndge Bowman.
Section 402(e) of the Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §802(e) provides:
An employee shall be ineligible for compensation for any week—
(e) In which his unemployment is due to his discharge or temporary suspension from work for willful misconduct. . . .