Summary of Issue: Factors To Consider

Decision A-0670.02 Full Text of Decision A-0670.02

The Commission denied benefits to the claimant who was on a three year training course, only available weekends and Mondays, with no work/school history and no search for work. The Court concluded that the Umpire had erred in law in failing to properly apply the test for availability set out in Faucher. The Court found that the claimant had not rebutted the presumption of unavailability.

Decision A-0043.01 Full Text of Decision A-0043.01

The Commission had determined that the claimant was not available for work as she had returned to school. The Court reiterates that the period of benefits in terms of duration is not relevant in determining the claimant's availability.

Decision 54968 Full Text of Decision 54968

Claimant attends a training program 5 days per week from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. She is doing a job search but would not leave her course unless she could earn $19/hr and would not work for minimum wage. No history of working while attending school and the course schedule limits her availability for work. Claimant disentitled for not being available and decision maintained both by BOR and the Umpire. Good review of the principles and the jurisprudence by Umpire in regards to availability vs full-time training course.

Decision 55383 Full Text of Decision 55383

Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0670.02

Decision 50194 Full Text of Decision 50194

Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0043.01

Decision 29563A Full Text of Decision 29563A

Clmt was a part-time student enrolled in a day course for personal enjoyment and had a history of working evening shifts. BOR erred in concluding that clmt was not available for work as BOR did not consider clmt’s previous pattern of work which was compatible with his class schedule, the type of course not being career oriented would have been easy to drop and the quality of his job search.

Decision 29205 Full Text of Decision 29205

It does not preclude one whose primary intention is to find work to occupy part of his time improving his intellectual background and acquiring additional tools to obtain work, provided he continues to seek employment. The studies allow him to do so and he would cease should a job become available.

Decision 26859 Full Text of Decision 26859

The course was job-related. This finding was clearly viewed as material for the Board to allow the case. The fact that the course was job-related is not a relevant factor.

Decision 23546 Full Text of Decision 23546

Graduate student who had completed all course-work and comprehensive exam requirements in April. No compelling connection to his academic institution or to rigorous time schedules. Full-time student who has a great deal of flexibility of course hours and duration. Prepared to change status.

Decision 23547 Full Text of Decision 23547

Unique case. The purpose of the course was to qualify him for the practice of law in Ontario. If his sole employment goal was dependent upon successful completion of the course, this would preclude his being available. However, he had other viable employment alternatives which he was pursuing.

Decision 18037 Full Text of Decision 18037

In every case the question which must be asked is whether claimant was available. This includes an examination of factors such as: flexibility of hours; money invested; intentions; job search; credit courses or merely for interest; length and timing of course.

Decision 15316 Full Text of Decision 15316

Attendance at a course is prima facie evidence of non-availability, but not automatic grounds for disentitlement. Factors to be examined: claimant's intention in case of job offer, amount of tuition, nature of course, purpose of taking course, job search.

Decision 14023 Full Text of Decision 14023

Factors to consider: full-time or part-time, the tuition paid, flexibility of course hours, duration, genuine intent of claimant to leave if work found, work pattern and claimant's efforts to find work. [p. 6]

Decision 13806 Full Text of Decision 13806

Full-time attendance raises a strong presumption. In favour of claimant: would leave the course, intention emphasized again later, extensive job search. Against claimant: course is full-time, substantial tuition fee, long-term course, normal working hours.

Decision 11358 Full Text of Decision 11358

One consideration is: would she have abandoned the course had employment become available? A number of factors to examine, for example tuition paid; if sum great less likely claimant would quit. Purpose? Personal fulfillment only or obtaining a diploma?