Court Opinion

ID: 9631473
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:39:41.020114+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:07:54.747333
License: Public Domain

CONCURRING OPINION BY
Judge FRIEDMAN.
I concur in the result reached by the majority because I agree that William T. Frazier (Claimant) is not entitled to unemployment benefits. However, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that Claimant is ineligible because his conviction for theft is the deliberate violation of a work rule, i.e., willful misconduct under section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law).1 Rather, I would conclude that Claimant is not entitled to unemployment benefits because he violated section 3 of the Law.2
The record indicates that Claimant was charged with two counts of theft by unlawful taking which occurred on August 9, 2001. {See O.R., Item No. 3, Employer’s Separation Information, Ex. 10.) The majority states that Claimant began working for Jefferson Hills Manor on October 10, 2001. (Majority op. at 2.) Thus, although Claimant pled guilty on May 2, 2002, resulting in Claimant’s discharge, Claimant’s misconduct occurred before Claimant was hired. For that reason, I cannot conclude that Claimant deliberately violated a known work rule.
Because Claimant’s misconduct occurred before Claimant was hired, it clearly constitutes non-work-related off-duty conduct. Under section 3 of the Law, a claimant is ineligible for benefits for non-work-related conduct if: (1) the conduct was contrary to acceptable standards of behavior; and (2) the unacceptable conduct affects or reflects upon the claimant’s ability to perform assigned duties. Burger v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 569 Pa. 139, 801 A.2d 487 (2002).
Here, Claimant’s theft by unlawful taking is a crime; therefore, as a matter of law, it constitutes conduct that is contrary to acceptable standards of behavior. Moreover, as a matter of law, Claimant’s conviction for the two misdemeanor counts *1186of theft by unlawful taking precludes Claimant from performing his job duties. See section 503(a) of the Older Adult Protective Services Act, Act of November 6, 1987, P.L. 381, as amended, 35 P.S. § § 10225.503(a) (prohibiting a facility from hiring or retaining an employee who has committed certain enumerated offenses). Therefore, under section 3 of the Law, Claimant is not entitled to benefits.

. Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex.Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(e).

. 43 P.S. § 752. Section 3 of the Law states that unemployment compensation is for persons who become unemployed through no fault of their own.