Pearson v. UCBR - Commonwealth Court - June 26, 2008 - UNPUBLISHED
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/2277CD07_6-26-08.pdf
Claimant was not eligible for benefits where she quit her job after the employer told her that "there would be no possibility of either promotion or increase in pay." Such a statement might "dampen her enthusiasm for continued employment; however, dampened enthusiasm is not a necessitous and compelling reason to quit."
"Claimant’s displeasure with being 'salary capped' was mere dissatisfaction with her working conditions....[M]ere dissatisfaction with one's working conditions does not constitute cause of a necessitous and compelling nature for terminating one's employment. Brunswick Hotel & Conference Center, LLC v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 906 A.2d 657 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006); McKeown v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 442 A.2d 1257 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1982)."
