Opinion
Argued December 8, 1980
February 10, 1981.
Unemployment compensation — Willful misconduct — Tardiness.
1. In an unemployment compensation case, tardiness without good cause, especially when accompanied by past violations and warnings, constitutes willful misconduct. [547]
Argued December 8, 1980, before Judges MENCER, BLATT and MacPHAIL, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 1807 C.D. 1979, from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the case of In Re: Claim of Leonard T. Stechly, No. B-174352.
Application to the Office of Employment Security for unemployment compensation benefits. Application denied. Applicant appealed to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Appeal denied. Applicant appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed.
Jack H. France, with him James W. Haines, Jr., Murphy, France Vanderman, for petitioner.
Karen Durkin, Assistant Attorney General, with her Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and Harvey Bartle, III, Acting Attorney General, for respondent.
Leonard T. Stechly (claimant) appeals from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which denied him benefits for willful misconduct pursuant to 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). We affirm.
Claimant was last employed as a transitman by Bethlehem Mines (employer). The Board found, on substantial evidence, that, during the period of January to May 1979, claimant was absent eleven times and tardy five times and that claimant was warned on several occasions in regard to his absenteeism and tardiness. The Board further found that, although claimant's absences were excused by reason of illness, his tardiness in reporting to work was without good cause. The Board concluded that claimant was guilty of willful misconduct for "continued failure to report to work on time," and this appeal followed.
Claimant's argument that his conduct did not rise to the level of willful misconduct is completely meritless. This Court has consistently held that "tardiness, without good cause, especially when accompanied by past violations and warnings, constitutes willful misconduct." Spicer v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 47 Pa. Commw. 272, 275, 407 A.2d 929, 930 (1979). See also Bowers v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 38 Pa. Commw. 171, 392 A.2d 890 (1978); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Glenn, 23 Pa. Commw. 240, 350 A.2d 890 (1976); Marcantonio v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 10 Pa. Commw. 204, 309 A.2d 462 (1973).
Accordingly, we enter the following
ORDER
NOW, this 10th day of February, 1981, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the above captioned case, dated July 25, 1979, denying benefits to Leonard T. Stechly, is hereby affirmed.