Works v. Bd. Of Review Of Unemployment Comp. Comm'n

• Decision Date: 18 February 1948
• Docket Number: No. 246.,246.
• Citation: 136 N.J.L. 645,57 A.2d 231
• Parties: BERGEN POINT IRON WORKS v. BOARD OF REVIEW OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION et al.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

136 N.J.L. 645

57 A.2d 231

BERGEN POINT IRON WORKS

v.BOARD OF REVIEW OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION et al.

No. 246.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Feb. 18, 1948.

Certiorari to Board of Review of Unemployment Compensation Commission.

Certiorari proceeding by the Bergen Point Iron Works, prosecutor, against the Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission and John F. Bonar to review a determination of the board awarding unemployment compensation to John F. Bonar.

Determination of the Board reversed.

COLIE, J., dissenting.

October term, 1947, before DONGES, COLIE and EASTWOOD, JJ.

Carpenter, Gilmour & Dwyer and Carl S. Kuebler, both of Jersey City, for prosecutor.

Clarence F. McGovern, of Jersey City, for defendants.

DONGES, Justice.

This is a writ of certiorari to review a determination of the Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission awarding unemployment compensation to the defendant, John F. Bonar, for the week from July 2nd to July 9th, 1947, and, presumably, thereafter for the statutory period as long as he continues to be unemployed. The Board of Review found the facts as follows, and such finding is supported by the evidence:

‘The claimant was employed as a watchman for the above named employer. On August 16, 1946, a strike was called at the above plant by the labor union which was recognized as the bargaining agent in protest against the discharge by the employer of one of the employees. The claimant was a member of the said labor union. The claimant continued to work for a week after the strike occurred but then was laid off because the plant had been blockaded by pickets.

‘The claimant was unemployed until February 1, 1947, when he secured a new job which he intended to accept as a permanent job. He worked there until June 16th, 1947, when he was laid off for lack of work. The strike was still in progress at the establishment where he had previously been employed.

‘The claimant admitted that he had been sick in bed between June 19 and July 1, 1947, but since that time he has been able to work and available for work.

‘While the claimant is no longer employed at the struck plant and does not intend to return to work there in any event, he has, on several occasions, expressed support of the strikers and has given them some encouragement.’

Based upon this factual situation the Board entered its opinion as follows:

‘Inasmuch as the claimant was laid off because the plant had been blockaded by pickets engaged in the labor dispute, his unemployment was originally due to a stoppage of work which existed because of a labor dispute. However, when he took permanent new employment and was subsequently laid off, his unemployment at that time was due to the layoff by the second employer and not to the stoppage of work at the first plant.

‘It is argued by the employer that, had there been no strike, ...