71 Pa. Commw. 550 | Pa. Commw. Ct. | 1983
Opinion by
Roy A. Glenn appeals an Uuemploymeut '.Compensation Board of Review (Board) denial of benefits. We affirm.
Glenn was hired by M,on Valley Health and Welfare Council (Mon Valley) as a caseworker aide through the CETA program.
The following day, Mon Valley terminated Glenn for excessive absenteeism. The referee reversed an award of benefits by the Office of Employment Security by finding that Glenn’s excessive absenteeism constituted willful misconduct
Glenn admits that he was absent three .and one-half of his first .six days of employment. The only evidence submitted to .prove good cause (other than Glenn’s own testimony, the credibility of wMch is for the referee and the Board to determine
Affirmed.
Order
The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review order No. B-188305, dated October 3, 1980, is hereby affirmed.
The Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §801 (1973). The expressed purpose of this legislation is to provide job training and employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged, unemployed and underemployed persons.
It was subsequently discovered that on July 7th, after reporting off work for health reasons, Glenn applied at the local Office of Employment Security for benefits for the week .ending July 5th.
Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. -Sess., P.L. (1937 ) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §802 (e), provides, in part, that 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 connected with his work. .. .
“[Ejxcessive unjustified absenteeism can constitute willful misconduct because it may evidence a wanton and willful disregard of tbe employer’s interest or a disregard of the standards of behavior which an employer can rightfully expect from his employer.” Id. at 284, 407 A.2d at 935.
Section 510.1 of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 P.S. §830.1.
Yazevac v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 60 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 90, 93, 430 A.2d 1207,1209 (1981).
The two statements read as follows:
“This patient was off July 7 to 14 under care of Dr. Bain.”
“This patient should return to work 7/14/80.”