Balsamo v. Commonwealth
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Per curiam
Opinion,
We are asked to decide whether the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) improperly affirmed the referee’s denial of benefits to Thomas Balsamo et al. (Petitioners).1 We need only determine the applicability of Section 402(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Act), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §802(d), the labor dispute section, for Petitioners concede that if that section applies, they cannot prevail.
Petitioners worked for Quaker State Coca-Cola Bottling Company (Employer) on a day to day basis as “extra” truck…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones & Langhlin Steel Corp. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kearney v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Pottorff v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996