Summary of Issue: Waiting For Record Of Employment

Decision 70876 Full Text of Decision 70876

The claimant delayed in applying for benefits because he could not obtain his Record of Employment and he thought he had to wait for it before filing his application. The claimant's representative submits that the Digest of Benefit Entitlement issued by the Commission is clear on the fact the claimant had good cause since the guide provides that one cannot apply for benefit or the claim cannot be finalized until there is a Record of Employment. As argued by Commission counsel, that is not exactly what the Digest suggests or what actually takes place. The world «finalize» is not synonymous to «initiate». If the claimant had appeared at the Commission office, he could have initiated a claim, which would then fulfill the requirements of filing under the Act. The Commission concluded, as does the BOR, one should not confuse «finalize» with «filing».

Decision 65711 Full Text of Decision 65711

The claimant explained the difficulties she had encountered in getting her last pay cheque as well as her record of employment and contacted the Commission when she was told by the Ministry of Labour that it would take as long as 120 days to complete their investigation. The Umpire found that the claimant had provided good reasons for her 6 week delay, considering all her circumstances and efforts to deal with her situation. He stated that the benefit of the doubt should be given to claimant in such situations rather than use the legislation to prevent a claimant from receiving benefits.

Decision 48773 Full Text of Decision 48773

Claimant delayed 6 months in filing his application for benefits while waiting for his Record of Employment (ROE). No requirement under the legislation that a ROE is required before an application for benefits can be made. No good cause established. Claimant's appeal dismissed.

Decision A-0268.94 Full Text of Decision A-0268.94

Claimant mistakenly believed that she needed an ROE to apply for benefits and relied on her former employer and while she made some attempts to obtain information from the Commission on the phone, she did not persist. Delay of 2 months. No reviewable error by Umpire in dismissing appeal.

Decision 26420 Full Text of Decision 26420

Claimant stated that she did not receive her Record of Employment until one month after but it has been held in CUB 24388 that waiting for a Record of Employment is no reason for not applying for benefits.

Decision 19789 Full Text of Decision 19789

Hospital pharmacist on sabbatical leave to be with husband in another area. Did not receive ROE until she resigned many months later. Continuously employed for 15 years. No experience with UI. Delay of 1 year. Took no steps to apprise herself of her rights and responsibilities.

Decision 17905 Full Text of Decision 17905

3-week delay; believed she had to wait for the record of employment and the possibility of a new job; a delay due largely to lack of experience. It seems to me obvious that the reason invoked [waiting for the record of employment] is not valid.

Decision 14261 Full Text of Decision 14261

Delay of 11 weeks. No grounds for antedating as per ALBRECHT. Claimant must take reasonable steps to apprise himself of his rights. He took no steps. He should have contacted the Commission sooner.

Decision 11844A Full Text of Decision 11844A

ALBRECHT quoted. There is no evidence that claimant took any steps to apprise herself of her rights. Claimants should refrain from acting on their own ill-founded assumptions [that ROE was required] without contacting the Commission.

Decision 13007 Full Text of Decision 13007

Laid off on 19-4-85 after 3 years at James Bay and received record of employment. Found other employment for 2 weeks in early May and 2 weeks in mid-June. Received last record of employment in 2-86 after many efforts. Working away since 8-85. Claiming 1-7-85 to 9-8-85.

Decision 12853 Full Text of Decision 12853

1 month in issue. Certainly claimant erred but was there good cause for error for purposes of 20(4)? Purpose of that section. Ignorance in itself not good cause for delay.

Decision 12762 Full Text of Decision 12762

Delay of 6 weeks: from 20-7 to 30-8. Difficulty in communicating in English. Employer took no pains to advise him properly. Employer's tardiness and default in making ROE immediately available despite claimant's best efforts. He did what a reasonable person would have done. [p.7]

Decision 12454 Full Text of Decision 12454

Claimant filed his claim together with ROE less than 3 weeks after his contract of employment expired. It was reasonable for him to delay for that length of time when he was acting under the mistaken belief that the ROE was required. [p. 4]

Decision 11936 Full Text of Decision 11936

Delay of 6 weeks. Decided cases do indicate that one who is ignorant of the law may have good cause if he took steps to ascertain his rights and obligations. CARON referred to. Nothing to this effect here.

Decision 11729 Full Text of Decision 11729

Ceased work 27-1; 10 attempts to get ROE. Employer in process of moving. Upon applying for welfare, told to apply for UI which he did 19-3. No lack of concern but concerted and continuous effort; also previous experience in antedating. Acted reasonably.

Decision 11532 Full Text of Decision 11532

Only employee in office. Hospitalized 5 days and convalescing at home 7 weeks. Thought wise to wait until returned to work to fill out record of employment herself. Not reasonable. Must not shelter behind incapacity to avoid obligations.

Decision 11515 Full Text of Decision 11515

Claimant says she did not know that she was to come to the Commission office to report without ROE. That alone would not bar her claim if only she could be shown to have done something reasonable about making her claim. Not her first claim and sought no advice. One could easily excuse quiescence for up to 3 weeks or a month, but this delay was longer [6 weeks] and she did nothing until ROE was in her hand. Innocent ignorance and thoughtless negligence.

Decision 11360 Full Text of Decision 11360

Claimant went to Ontario Department of Labour and with their help, he received his ROE 3 months after separation. Was not offered any advice to file claim. He simply assumed, without making enquiries, that he was not able to file until ROE received.

Decision 10787 Full Text of Decision 10787

5 weeks in issue. By waiting over a month without requesting information at CEIC, insured did not act reasonably. Should not simply have waited for record of employment, but should have contacted CEIC when dismissed.

Decision A-0128.80 Full Text of Decision A-0128.80

Error on record of employment. Time spent waiting for correction plus fact that insured moved justified 2 month delay, according to the Umpire. Judgment reversed by the FC: the insured did not prove that she had good reason for her delay.