Decision A-0613.81

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
Decision A-0613.81 Bertrand B.  Federal  English 1982-05-21
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Dismissed Unanimous  No N/A 


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
refusal of work  babysitting arrangements 

Summary:

The Umpire erred in law in saying that babysitting difficulties amounted to good cause, given the conclusion that claimant could not restrict her availability to the extent she had. If not available due to these difficulties, these cannot amount to goodcause. [p._15] Claimant's failure to find a babysitter despite strong and reasonable efforts to do so could not in law constitute good cause for her refusal to apply for suitable employment within 40(1). [p.15]


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
basic concepts  disqualification and disentitlement 

Summary:

Claimant disqualified and disentitled; she refused employment because she could not find a babysitter. Double penalty argument not raised.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
availability for work  restrictions  hours of work 

Summary:

Whether a person who is able to work only from 4:00 p.m. because she is unable to find a babysitter, should be considered available because she has made reasonable efforts to find a babysitter is at least partly a question of law. [p.12]


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
availability for work  incompatible situations  good reasons 

Summary:

The Umpire erred in law when he concluded that, notwithstanding claimant's restrictions as to hours, she was available because she had made reasonable efforts to find a babysitter. [p.14] Availability cannot depend upon the particular reasons for the restrictions however these may evoke sympathetic concern. Otherwise, availability would be a completely varying requirement depending on the view taken in each case for the relative lack of it. [p.14]


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
availability for work  incompatible situations  family obligations 

Summary:

Claimant's failure to find a babysitter despite strong and reasonable efforts to do so could not in law make her available for suitable employment within 14(a). [p.15]


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  errors in law  availability concept 

Summary:

Whether a person who is able to work only from 4:00 p.m. because she is unable to find a babysitter, should be considered available because she has made reasonable efforts to find a babysitter is at least partly a question of law. [p.12] The Umpire erred in law when he concluded that, notwithstanding claimant's restrictions as to hours, she was available because she had made reasonable efforts to find a babysitter. [p.14]


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  errors in law  meaning of a term 

Summary:

The Umpire erred in law in saying that babysitting difficulties amounted to good cause, given the conclusion that claimant could not restrict her availability to the extent she had. If not available due to these difficulties, these cannot amount to goodcause. [p._15]


Date modified: