in rejecting an equal protection challenge to Section 402.6 of the UC Law based on the disparate treatment of claimants who had been convicted of crimes, the Commonwealth Court acknowledged that Section 306(a)(2) of the WC Act removed all doubt concerning the disqualifying effect that incarceration has on the entitlement to workers’ compensation benefits
How later courts described this case
- in rejecting an equal protection challenge to Section 402.6 of the UC Law based on the disparate treatment of claimants who had been convicted of crimes, the Commonwealth Court acknowledged that Section 306(a)(2) of the WC Act removed all doubt concerning the disqualifying effect that incarceration has on the entitlement to workers’ compensation benefits
- affirming the Board’s denial of benefits to a claimant under Section 402.6 during weeks that he was eligible for work release
- claimant disqualified under Section 402.6 for weeks he was incarcerated but eligible for work release
- claimant disqualified under Section 402.6 for weeks he was *296incarcerated but eligible for work release
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
FRIEDMAN, Judge,
dissenting.
I must respectfully dissent.
Unlike the majority, with its hypothetical, “rational” reasons to deny unemployment compensation benefits to incarcerated prisoners, I can see nothing rational about denying unemployment compensation to an individual, who otherwise would be entitled to benefits and who is available for work, merely because that individual also is an incarcerated prisoner. Accordingly, I would conclude that section 402.6 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law) 1 is unconstitutional, and I would reverse the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review finding Douglas Neale Kroh ineligible for benefits under that section of the Law.
. Section 402.6 of Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex.Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802.6.