The potters herald. [volume] (East Liverpool, Ohio) 1899-1982, 1940-04-11
Board of Review
Repudiofes Full
Time Conception
Labor Member Roberts Cast
Only Dissenting Vote
In Test Case
(By Ohio Labor News Service)

Columbus ,O.-The first actual test
case involving the method of determ-
ining the average weekly wage was
decided by the Board of Review of the
Ohio Bureau of Unemployment Com
pensation April when the Board, by
a two to one vote, upheld the Admin
istrator and the employer and repudi-
ated the full-time concept in comput-
ing benefits and refused to consider
union contracts between employer and
employees stipulating normal work
weeks.
William T. Roberts, Labor member
of the Board, cast the only dissenting
vote and gave dissenting opinion in
which he ably defended the position
which Labor has steadfastly maintain
ed and which is in harmony with the
law and the decision of Judge Charles
A. Leach of the Franklin County
Courts. The other members are Ver-
ner +. Metcalf and Walter ]. Mackey,
Republican appointees of Governor
John w. Bricker.
Stella Theresa Pawlak, Akron, an
employe Of the B. F. Goodrich Com
pany, filed her application for bene-
fits with the Akron office of the Bu-
reau of Unemployment Compensation,
May 15, 1889. The Administrator on
May "a fixed her average weekly sal
ary at $3.50. The claimant protested
and appealed to the Board June e.
The case was referred to a Referee
where the average weekly wage was
increased from $3.50 to $25. The
employer appealed to the Board Of
Review from the Referees decision.
The case was heard by the Board of
Review January 9, 1910. Under the
full-time concept her salary amounted
to $50 week.
The main question involved is what
constitutes full-time work week. The
claimant was member of a union
which had a contract with the employ
er and which contract provided that
the normal work week shall be sc
hours.
The majority decision holds that use
of union contract or agreement as
to what constitutes a normal work
week is precluded by the statute in
that it does not take into account each
individuals actual work experience
and does not permit the application of
the average" concept which they in
sist is intended by the Act.
There are approximately 100000
men and women in Ohio working un-
der contracts or agreements, stipulat
ing, among other things, what con-
stitutes normal working week, who
will be interested in this reasoning of
the majority of the Board.
Board Member Roberts in his dis
senting opinion cites recent decision
of the Appeals Tribunal of Iowa,
Cease No. 80, A-I-Z) in which case q
union agreement was in force and
where the employer and the employees
agreed that the full-time weekly wage
was to be scheduled at hours day
for five days week. The Appeals
Tribunal ruled that the work week as
provided in the union agreement,
which was 40 hours per week, would
apply.
at can be reasonably assumed" con-
tinued Mr.. Roberts "that the term
'full-time week in Rule 8 is the same
standard set up for normal week
in the union agreement between the
employer (The b. +. Goodrich Com
pany) and Local Union No. 5, United
Rubber Workers of America. The
normal work week was fixed, not be-
cause it was anticipated that the work
err would be employed the full number
of hours in each and every week, but
as standard for weeks of full time.
In Rule 3 the full-time week intended
to provide just such standard, of
which so per cent would provide a de-
cent benefit rate to an unemployed
worker.
"In the instant case, the employer
is endeavoring to use actual earnings
of the claimant to determine average
weekly wage, when the claimant was
employed on a part-time basis, as dur
ing the quarter claimant had been en-
ployed full-time (3G hours) in only
one of the weeks.
"The determination of average
weekly wage by the employer includ-
ed claimants full-time week, and
other weeks in which claimant was
employed part-time, even to the extent
of using one week in which claimant
had worked less than one day. If this
procedure were to be pursued, part
time would be some per cent of part
time and not a percentage of the earn
ings based upon full-time week."
"In the case in question the Admin
istrator based his determination upon
the actual earnings for the quarter
and set the average weekly wage at
$3.50, and had included in the aver
age weekly wage week in which the
claimant had only been employed five
hours, ten other weeks in which the
worker was employed part time, and
one week in which the worker was
employed full time or for the normal
work week.
"The Referee determined that the
aVero oe weekly wage Should he S25 90