Bruce v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

**What happened:** A worker named Bruce was employed at Chapman Nissan but failed to show up for work or call in sick on March 5-6, 2009. The reason for her absence was that she was in jail during this time. After losing her job, Bruce applied for unemployment benefits, but the state denied her claim. She challenged this decision, arguing she should receive benefits. **What the court decided:** The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court sided with the state unemployment office. The court ruled that Bruce's failure to report to work or notify her employer for two straight days counted as "willful misconduct" under Pennsylvania law, even though she was incarcerated. This misconduct disqualified her from receiving unemployment benefits. **Why this matters for workers:** This case shows that workers can lose their right to unemployment benefits if they don't follow basic workplace rules about attendance and communication, even when facing serious personal circumstances like legal troubles. Workers should understand that being unable to work due to incarceration may not excuse them from workplace notification requirements, and this could affect their eligibility for unemployment compensation if they lose their job as a result.