SHIRLEY H. WILSON HOLDEN, Appellant,
BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, and JCP&L FIRST ENERGY, Respondents.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted June 11, 2013
On appeal from the Board of Review, Department of Labor, Docket No. 120, 360.
Shirley H. Wilson Holden, appellant, pro se.
John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General, attorney for respondent Board of Review (Lewis A. Scheindlin, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Christopher M. Kurek, Deputy Attorney General, of counsel and on the brief).
Respondent JCP&L First Energy has not filed a brief.
Before Judges Parrillo and Messano.
Shirley H. Wilson Holden appeals from the final decision of the Board of Review (the Board) dated March 21, 2011, affirming the decision of the Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) that ordered repayment of unemployment benefits in the amount of $3184, which Holden received for the weeks ending December 11, 2004 through January 22, 2005. After the appeal was filed, we granted the Board's motion for remand. A telephonic hearing was conducted on August 31, 2012, after which, on September 14, 2012 (the September 2012 decision), the Board re-affirmed its prior decision requiring repayment.
The record reveals that at all relevant times, Holden was an employee of Jersey Central Power and Light (JCP&L). As to the background of the labor dispute at issue, the general history of which is undisputed, we quote from the September 2012 decision.
On December 8, 2004, approximately 1300 members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union (IBEW) struck the employer . . . . The strike ended on March 16, 2005 and the union workers returned to their jobs.
The striking workers filed unemployment claims and sought to collect benefits. The Division denied benefits under the labor dispute section of the law. On appeal by the union, the . . . Tribunal held that there was no work stoppage and that the claimants were eligible for benefits, leading to the payment of benefits to the claimants, including [Holden] . . . .
JCP&L appealed, and the Board "issued the first of its three decisions in the matter[, ]" concluding there "existed a work stoppage" and "the claimants were disqualified for benefits from December 8, 2004 through March 15, 2005 . . . ." The IBEW appealed.
In a reported opinion, we affirmed the Board's finding of a work stoppage, but we remanded for further consideration of the "newly[-]enacted" anti-lockout provision, N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(d)(2).Bustard v. Bd. of Review, 401 N.J.Super. 383, 390 (App. Div. 2008). The Board then issued its second decision, "rejecting the ...