Opinion
January 24, 1983.
Unemployment compensation — Relevance of grievance procedure.
1. The outcome of union grievance procedures and even the subsequent reinstatement of a discharged employe are of no relevance or effect on a determination of eligibility for unemployment compensation benefits. [315]
Submitted on briefs October 6, 1982, to President Judge CRUMLISH, JR. and Judges MacPHAIL and DOYLE, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 1005 C.D. 1981, from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of William J. Walter, No. B-193326.
Application with the Office of Employment Security for unemployment compensation benefits. Benefits denied. Applicant appealed to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Denial affirmed. Applicant appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed.
Patricia Ray, for petitioner.
Charles G. Hasson, Assistant Counsel, with him Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirmed a referee's denial of benefits to William Walter under Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law. Walter appeals. We affirm.
Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P. S. § 802(e). This section provides in pertinent part:
§ 802. Ineligibility for compensation
An employe 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. . . .
Walter, a maintenance man with General Steel, was discharged for excessive absenteeism and tardiness.
Walter asserts error in the Board's decision because of the pendency of a labor grievance arbitration. This contention is clearly without merit. The outcome of a union grievance procedure has no effect on the determination of eligibility for unemployment compensation benefits. Welsh v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 44 Pa. Commw. 53, 402 A.2d 1154 (1979).
The purpose of the Unemployment Compensation Law . . . is to compensate individuals who become unemployed through no fault of their own. Excessive absenteeism and tardiness violative of reasonable standards of conduct that an employer has a right to expect of employees constitutes [sic] willful misconduct. Woodson v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 461 Pa. 439, 336 A.2d 867 (1975). An agreement by an employer to reinstate an employee would not change the nature of such conduct. (Emphasis added.)
Id. at 55, 402 A.2d at 1155.
The order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review is hereby affirmed.
Even though not challenged by the appellant, we note that the findings of the Board are supported by ample evidence in the record.
Affirmed.
ORDER
The order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-193326 dated March 17, 1981, is hereby affirmed.