Opinion
November 14, 1962.
December 12, 1962.
Unemployment Compensation — Voluntary termination of employment — Cause of necessitous and compelling nature — Dissatisfaction with wages — Evidence — Findings of board — Appellate review.
1. In an unemployment compensation case, in which it appeared that claimant first testified that she left her job as house mother at a home for children because her pay was not sufficient for her needs, and at a further hearing testified that the presence of delinquent girls at the home made her very nervous and she could not work, it was Held that there was evidence to sustain the board's findings that claimant voluntarily terminated her employment because of dissatisfaction with her wages, without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature.
2. Findings of fact by the board, supported by competent evidence, are conclusive on appeal.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ. (WOODSIDE, J., absent).
Appeal, No. 198, April T., 1962, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-70372, in re claim of Margaret Biczak. Decision affirmed.
Margaret Biczak, appellant, in propria persona.
Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him David Stahl, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.
Argued November 14, 1962.
The claimant voluntarily left her employment and consequently is not entitled to compensation unless she left for "cause of a necessitous and compelling nature": Section 402(b)(1) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, as amended, 43 P. S. § 802(b)(1). The claimant testified before the referee that she left her job as house mother at a home for children because the pay was not sufficient for her needs. This is not necessitous or compelling cause under the act: Morris Unemployment Compensation Case, 196 Pa. Super. 68, 173 A.2d 651 (1961).
Upon appeal to the board the case was remanded to the referee for a further hearing. At the remand hearing the claimant testified that she left her employment because there were delinquent girls at the home and this made her very nervous and she couldn't work. Faced with her conflicting statements as to her reason for leaving work, the board found that she left because of dissatisfaction with her wages and denied compensation. Since the board's finding is supported by competent evidence, it is conclusive upon the court. Progress Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 406 Pa. 163, 176 A.2d 632 (1962).
Decision affirmed.