Decision A-1036.92
Full Text of Decision A-1036.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The purpose was said to be the preservation of government neutrality during labour disputes and the avoidance of the inequity of using an employer's contribution to the UI fund to finance a strike against himself. This rationale has been criticized by some but remains nevertheless the policy basis.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision 21236
Full Text of Decision 21236
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1036.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision 21842
Full Text of Decision 21842
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Principle of neutrality examined and discussed. It is not related to the payment or non-payment of benefits in relation to a specific labour dispute. It applies to the operation of an UI scheme in general. It is not infringed by the non-payment of benefits in the present case.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
temporary measures |
|
Decision 14715
Full Text of Decision 14715
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0226.88
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
Decision A-0226.88
Full Text of Decision A-0226.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
As per ZWARICH, the rule found in ss. 31(1) is neither fundamentally unjust nor unreasonable. It is necessary in order to ensure that the CEIC will not take sides in labour complaints and funds will not be used to lend support to strikers. Leave to appeal to SC denied.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
Decision 16202
Full Text of Decision 16202
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Enacted to ensure government will always adopt a neutral posture in regard to labour disputes. Providing UI to employees who are striking their employer's operations would distort the intended balance of collective bargaining which comes to a critical impasse.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
Decision 1909488
Full Text of Decision 1909488
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Since the purpose of the Act is to make benefits available to the unemployed, a liberal interpretation of re-entitlement provisions is warranted, given the Act was not designed to deprive innocent victims of benefits and also employees do contribute to UI fund. [p. 35]
The purpose of s.31 as well as the purpose of the Act as a whole (to provide benefits to involuntarily unemployed persons) dictate that a narrow interpretation be given to the disentitlement provisions of that section. Any doubt (as stated in ABRAHAMS) should be resolved in favour of the claimant.
Re: principle of neutrality underlying the labour dispute provisions. This rationale has been criticized. As originally enacted in England and later incorporated in Canada, it does not today enjoy much favour due to different states of labour relations.[p. 35-38]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
Decision 12543
Full Text of Decision 12543
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0521.86
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
Decision A-0521.86
Full Text of Decision A-0521.86
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The rule in ss. 31(1) is necessary in order to ensure that the Commission will not take sides in labour complaints and that its funds will not be used to lend support to employees in a labour dispute with their employer.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
Decision S-0879.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The Court quoted the comments of an author who stated: "A fund to which employers had contributed should not have been used against them. Government neutrality must be preserved. This is the purpose." [p. 9]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Decision 12700
Full Text of Decision 12700
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The labour dispute provisions are designed to prevent payment to employees in dispute. The UI fund is to assist those persons involuntarily unemployed and seeking work. Not to assist either party in dispute both of whom have contributed to the fund.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
Decision 11403
Full Text of Decision 11403
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0942.85
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
duration |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| federal court |
reasons for judgment not stated |
interpretation |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision A-0942.85
Full Text of Decision A-0942.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Termination of disentitlement under 31(2) is not contrary to the policy of the Act, which is to provide benefits to unemployed persons while avoiding having such benefits used for the purposes of financing a labour dispute.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
duration |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| federal court |
reasons for judgment not stated |
interpretation |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 12102
Full Text of Decision 12102
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
S. 31 essentially intended to ensure there is no bias in Act in terms of labour relations and purpose is to prevent benefits being used indirectly to finance dispute, which would disturb that neutrality. [p. 7]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
definition |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision 11920
Full Text of Decision 11920
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
S. 44 does not admit of any flexibility. Primary requirement is to avoid UI system becoming trump card in settling disputes. Legislation so clear and absolute that no tribunal may consider merits of dispute.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
business discontinued |
|
Decision 11475
Full Text of Decision 11475
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
S.31 is a statutory expression of the principle that UI benefits should not be perceived as supporting either side in initiating or prolonging labour strife.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
hired due to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
Decision A-1082.84
Full Text of Decision A-1082.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The UI Fund is intended for workers who, after losing their employment, do not succeed in immediately finding another one; it is not intended for inactive employees who have directly (strike) or indirectly (lock-out) chosen to be unemployed. [Marceau, J.]
If the UI Fund had to serve to finance employees on strike in some way, the operation of economic forces that should force a settlement of labour disputes could be completely distorted. [Marceau, J.]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
dismissal upon settlement of labour dispute |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
definition |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
strike anticipated |
|
Decision 10790
Full Text of Decision 10790
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
UI Act has established valid and practical scheme to protect public against loss of income; must be protected by rules including rule dealing with labour disputes. Never intended to compensate for this type of loss.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| labour dispute |
regularly engaged |
definition |
|
Decision A-0175.84
Full Text of Decision A-0175.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under S-0175.84
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
Decision A-0879.82
Full Text of Decision A-0879.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
The Court quoted the comments of an author who stated: "A fund to which employers had contributed should not have been used against them. Government neutrality must be preserved. This is the purpose." [p. 9]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Decision A-0090.81
Full Text of Decision A-0090.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Not to apply 44(1) to the loss of employment during a benefit period would be difficult to reconcile with the obvious purpose of that provision not to permit that the funds of UI be used to subsidize a party to a labour dispute.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
dual employment |
|
