Opinion
Argued May 8, 1981
November 16, 1981.
Unemployment compensation — Failure to advise of rights — Remand.
1. When a referee in an unemployment compensation case fails to advise an unrepresented claimant of his right to procure counsel, to offer witnesses on his behalf and to cross-examine adverse witnesses, the case must be remanded for a new hearing. [393]
Argued May 8, 1981, before Judges MENCER, CRAIG and PALLADINO, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 838 C.D. 1980, from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Lenny E. Vitko, No. B-182037.
Application with the Office of Employment Security for trade readjustment allowance benefits. Application denied. Applicant appealed to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Denial affirmed. Applicant appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Order vacated. Case remanded.
Richard J. Russell, for petitioner.
Francine Ostrovsky, Assistant Attorney General, with her Stephen B. Lipson, Assistant Attorney General, Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and Harvey Bartle, III, Attorney General, for respondent.
Lenny E. Vitko (claimant) has appealed from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirming a referee's decision which denied him trade readjustment allowance benefits because he was disqualified for unemployment compensation pursuant to Section 402(a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P. S. § 802(a), for his failure, without good cause, to apply for suitable work. We vacate and remand.
The claimant contends that he had good cause to refuse to report for an employment interview with the United States Postal Service because the job concerned was unsuitable. We do not decide the merits of that contention because the claimant also argues that he was denied a fair hearing. Before the referee, the claimant was unrepresented by counsel and was not advised of his right to secure an attorney.
In an unemployment compensation case, a referee must advise an unrepresented claimant of his right to procure an attorney, to offer witnesses on his behalf, and to cross-examine adverse witnesses. Hoffman v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 60 Pa. Commw. 108, 430 A.2d 1036 (1981); Katz v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 59 Pa. Commw. 427, 430 A.2d 354 (1981). Because the referee did not so advise the claimant, we must remand this case to the Board for a new hearing consistent with this opinion.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 16th day of November, 1981, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the above captioned case, dated March 17, 1980, is vacated, and the record is remanded for a new hearing consistent with this opinion.