City of Altoona v. UCBR

CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 24, 2023
Docket728 C.D. 2021
StatusPublished

This text of City of Altoona v. UCBR (City of Altoona v. UCBR) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Altoona v. UCBR, (Pa. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

City of Altoona, : Petitioner : : v. : No. 728 C.D. 2021 : Submitted: July 14, 2023 Unemployment Compensation : Board of Review, : Respondent :

BEFORE: HONORABLE ANNE E. COVEY, Judge HONORABLE MICHAEL H. WOJCIK, Judge HONORABLE MARY HANNAH LEAVITT, Senior Judge

OPINION BY SENIOR JUDGE LEAVITT FILED: October 24, 2023

The City of Altoona (Employer) petitions for this Court’s review of the adjudication of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review’s (Board) holding that Kandy M. Yon (Claimant) was eligible for unemployment compensation benefits under Section 402.1 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law).1 The only issue before this Court is whether the Board erred in holding that Employer had not established an “educational service agency” to employ school crossing guards within the meaning of Section 402.1(4) of the Law, 43 P.S. §802.1(4). Upon review, we conclude the Board erred and, thus, reverse. Claimant worked for Employer as a part-time school crossing guard for the Altoona Area School District (School District) during the academic year. The last day of the 2019-2020 school year for the School District was June 5, 2020.

1 Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, added by Section 5 of the Act of July 6, 1977, P.L. 41, 43 P.S. §802.1. Claimant filed claims for unemployment benefits for the weeks ending June 13, 2020, through August 1, 2020, and received $1,112 in benefits. Claimant returned to her position as a school crossing guard on August 26, 2020, the first day of classes for the 2020-2021 school year. On December 22, 2020, the Altoona UC Service Center issued a notice of determination finding Claimant ineligible for unemployment benefits for the stated reason that Claimant’s unemployment occurred between two academic years and that Employer had provided a bona fide offer of work for the successive academic year. The Service Center also issued a notice of non-fault overpayment of the $1,112 she had been paid. Claimant appealed, and the Referee conducted a telephonic hearing. On February 12, 2021, the Referee affirmed the Service Center’s decision. In particular, the Referee found that Employer had established an educational service agency within the meaning of Section 402.1(4) of the Law. Claimant appealed to the Board, which reversed the Referee’s decision. Under Section 402.1(4) of the Law, an individual employed by an educational service agency is ineligible for unemployment compensation for the period between two successive academic years so long as that individual has been given reasonable assurance of employment in the next year. 43 P.S. §802.1(4). It was undisputed that Claimant worked in accordance with the School District calendar and had reasonable assurance of returning to work with Employer after the summer recess. Nevertheless, the Board found that Claimant was not employed by an “educational service agency” within the meaning of Section 402.1(4) of the Law because Employer, a municipality, “serves more functions” than “providing such services in one or more educational institutions.” Board Adjudication, 5/14/2021, at 2. As such,

2 the Board concluded that Claimant was eligible for benefits for weeks between two successive academic years under Section 402.1 of the Law. Employer petitioned for this Court’s review. On appeal,2 Employer raises one issue for this Court’s consideration, which is whether the Board erred in holding that Employer had not established an “educational service agency” in accordance with Section 402.1(4) of the Law, 43 P.S. §802.1(4). Employer argues that the testimony and evidence presented before the Referee established that Employer is the sole provider of school crossing guards for the School District.3 Further, Claimant signed an acknowledgment that Employer “employed her in the capacity of an Educational Service Agency.” Employer Brief at 9. Employer cites City of Pittsburgh, Department of Public Safety v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 927 A.2d 675 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007), in which the claimant, a school crossing guard employed by the city, was found ineligible for unemployment benefits during the period when schools were closed for summer recess. The Board responds that Employer failed to meet its burden of proving that it had established an educational service agency as defined in Section 402.1(4)

2 Our scope of review determines whether constitutional rights were violated, whether an error of law was committed, or whether the findings of fact were unsupported by substantial evidence. Miller v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 83 A.3d 484, 486 n.2 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014). The Board is the ultimate factfinder and has the discretion to resolve matters of credibility and evidentiary conflicts, which this Court may not reverse on appeal when supported by substantial evidence. Chiccitt v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 842 A.2d 540, 542 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004). 3 Employer also cites to “Supplement to the Reproduced Record.” By order of November 22, 2021, this Court granted the Board’s motion to strike the Supplement to the Reproduced Record for the stated reason that the documents included therein were not part of the certified record. As such, we do not consider the Supplement to the Reproduced Record in reviewing Employer’s appeal.

3 of the Law. Employer, a municipality, performs many functions beyond the provision of crossing guards to schools. It contends that City of Pittsburgh is distinguishable because in that case, the city presented evidence that it had established an “office of school guards” that constituted an educational service agency. City of Pittsburgh, 927 A.2d at 677. We begin with a review of Section 402.1 of the Law. It states, in relevant part, as follows: Benefits based on service for educational institutions pursuant to Article X, XI or XII shall as hereinafter provided be payable in the same amount, on the same terms and subject to the same conditions as outlined in section 404(g); except that: (1) With respect to service performed after December 31, 1977, in an instructional, research, or principal administrative capacity for an educational institution, benefits shall not be paid based on such services for any week of unemployment commencing during the period between two successive academic years, or during a similar period between two regular terms whether or not successive or during a period of paid sabbatical leave provided for in the individual’s contract, to any individual if such individual performs such services in the first of such academic years or terms and if there is a contract or a reasonable assurance that such individual will perform services in any such capacity for any educational institution in the second of such academic years or terms. (2) With respect to services performed after October 31, 1983, in any other capacity for an educational institution, benefits shall not be paid on the basis of such services to any individual for any week which commences during a period between two successive academic years or terms if such individual performs such services in the first of such academic years or terms and there is a reasonable assurance that such individual will perform such services in the second of such academic years or terms. (3) With respect to any services described in clause (1) or (2), benefits payable on the basis of such services shall be denied to

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Chiccitt v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
842 A.2d 540 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2004)
Miller v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
83 A.3d 484 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
City of Altoona v. UCBR, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-altoona-v-ucbr-pacommwct-2023.