UC - willful misconduct - rule violation - good cause for non-compliance - circumstances
Bell v. UCBR – Cmwlth. Court – April 26, 2016 – unpublished memorandum opinion*
“The fact that the claimant knew the employer rules and did not strictly comply with it does not necessarily require a finding of willful misconduct.” Circumstances may provide good cause for lack of compliance.
In this case, claimant had a very minor accident (knocked over a mailbox). Employer rules required the immediate reporting of accidents. Claimant didnt report until he returned to the office. Circumstances included that: the accident was very minor; claimant’s cell phone did not work, nor did his partner’s; his partner, who was senior to him, advised that it was ok not to report until returning to the office; claimant reported immediately upon return to the office.
*An unreported Commonwealth Court case may not be cited binding precedent but can be cited for its persuasive value. See 210 Pa. Code § 69.414(b) and Pa. R.A.P. 3716
If the case is old, the link may have become stale and may not work, but you can use the case name, court, and date to find the opinion in another source (e.g., Westlaw, Lexis, Google Scholar)