Opinion
Argued December 5, 1975
December 29, 1975.
Unemployment compensation — Reduction of benefits — Pension payments — Unemployment Compensation Law, Act 1936, December 5, P.L. (1937) 2897 — Cause of retirement.
1. Provisions of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act 1936, December 5, P.L. (1937) 2897, require that unemployment compensation benefits be reduced when the claimant receives payments in excess of forty dollars per week under an employer retirement pension plan to which the employer has contributed, and it is immaterial whether the retirement resulted from attainment of retirement age, disability or some other cause. [536-7]
Argued December 5, 1975, before Judges KRAMER, WILKINSON, JR., and ROGERS, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeals, Nos. 299, 354 and 395 C.D. 1975, from the Orders of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in cases of In Re: Claim of Michael J. Gervasi, No. B-124516; In Re: Claim of Michael F. Kozempel, No. B-124747; and In Re: Claim of Salvatore Martines, No. B-124748.
Unemployment compensation benefits reduced by the Bureau of Employment Security. Claimants appealed to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Reduction affirmed. Claimants appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed.
Richard Kirschner, with him Neal Goldstein, and Markowitz Kirschner, for appellants.
Daniel R. Schuckers, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.
These are appeals by Michael J. Gervasi, Michael F. Kozempel, and Salvatore Martines from orders of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review dated February 18 and March 5, 1975, in which the Board sustained a reduction of the appellants' benefits in accordance with Section 404(d)(iii) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act of December 5, 1936, Second. Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P. S. § 804 (d)(iii), and this Court's decision in G. C. Murphy Company v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 13 Pa. Commw. 537, 319 A.2d 438 (1974).
The sole issue presented is whether this Court erred on the question of statutory interpretation involved in G. C. Murphy. The parties agree on all of the significant facts, and they further agree that, unless we overrule G. C. Murphy, that case controls the instant appeal and the Board must be affirmed. The appellants urge us to reconsider G. C. Murphy.
We have carefully examined G. C. Murphy in light of the arguments advanced by the appellants, and we find no contention that was not considered thoroughly when we reached our decision in that case.
We see no reason to overrule G. C. Murphy, and, consequently, we
ORDER
AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 1975, it is ordered that the orders of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review dated February 18 and March 5, 1975, in the above-captioned matters, are affirmed.