What it is
The Board of Review is a three-member appellate body within the Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry. It reviews appeals from UC Referee decisions on a record review — meaning the Board reads the transcript and exhibits from the referee hearing, considers the parties' written arguments, and issues a decision. It does not take new evidence and does not generally hold oral argument.
The Board's decisions:
- Affirm — the referee's decision stands
- Reverse — the referee's decision is set aside
- Modify — the referee's decision is changed in some respect
- Remand — sent back to the referee for further proceedings
The Board's standard of review is deferential. It defers to the referee's credibility findings unless they are unsupported by substantial evidence or capriciously made. The Board's interventions are typically limited to:
- Legal errors (the referee misstated the law or applied the wrong standard)
- Findings unsupported by substantial evidence
- Procedural defects (the referee failed to consider a contested issue, denied due process)
- Manifest injustice
The Board is the second of three appellate levels. From the Board, appeals go to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the state's intermediate appellate court. Commonwealth Court decisions can in turn be appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court — though the Supreme Court takes few UC cases (review is by allowance).
Where it comes from
- Statute: 43 P.S. § 823 — establishment and authority of the Board
- Filing deadline: 43 P.S. § 822 — appeals must be filed within 15 days of the referee decision (mailing date)
- Procedural rules: 34 Pa. Code Chapter 101
- Standard of review: appellate review for legal error, abuse of discretion, and substantial evidence
- Subsequent appeal: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (43 P.S. § 510), with appeals filed within 30 days of the Board's order
The Board's procedural rules and decisions are accessible through the Department's online resources.
Who it applies to
| Party | When they appeal to the Board |
|---|---|
| Worker | Referee denied UC; worker disputes findings or legal conclusions |
| Employer | Referee granted UC; employer disputes findings |
The Board accepts written arguments — typically a "Brief in Support of Appeal" filed by the appellant within a few weeks of the appeal. The other party may file a responsive brief. Oral argument before the Board is rare and granted only in unusual cases.
The Board's decisions are issued in writing, typically 2-6 months after the appeal is filed (depending on complexity and Board caseload). Both parties continue to comply with the referee's order during the appeal — there is no stay mechanism in most circumstances.
What it means in practice
Scenario 1 — Worker appeals adverse referee decision. A referee denied UC after concluding the worker engaged in willful misconduct. The worker files an appeal to the Board, arguing that (1) the referee applied the wrong legal standard, (2) the findings were unsupported by substantial evidence, and (3) the referee improperly relied on hearsay testimony from the employer's HR representative. The Board reviews the transcript and exhibits. If the legal arguments have merit, the Board may reverse or remand. If the referee's findings are supported by substantial evidence and the legal standard was applied correctly, the Board affirms — even if a different referee might have credited the worker's testimony differently.
Scenario 2 — Procedural remand. A referee issued a decision but failed to address one of the worker's arguments — that the conduct was attributable to a documented medical condition. The worker appeals to the Board. The Board concludes the referee did not adequately consider the medical-condition argument and remands to the referee for additional findings on that specific issue. On remand, the referee holds a focused hearing (or accepts written submissions) and issues a supplemental decision.
Scenario 3 — Affirmance despite sympathy. The referee denied UC after a long hearing in which the worker presented a sympathetic case but the documentary record favored the employer. The worker appeals. The Board reads the record. Even if the Commissioners might have decided differently themselves, the standard of review is whether the referee's findings were unsupported by substantial evidence — and the documents in the record substantially support the referee's conclusions. The Board affirms. The worker's only further recourse is the Commonwealth Court, which applies the same deferential standard.