Summary of Issue

Decision A0234.14 Full Text of Decision A0234.14

The FCA decided that the SST and the BOR applied the proper test to determine if the claimant had other reasonable alternative than to leave her employment because she had no way to get to work for the night schedule, her car was seized in error by the city of Montreal. Before the FCA, the claimant relied on new evidence. Generally, the FCA examines the validity of the decision subjected to judicial review on the basis of the evidence which were before the administrative decision-maker. The application for judicial review was rejected. The FCA's decision can be found in French only at this address: http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/fr/item/108382/index.do

Decision 43706 Full Text of Decision 43706

Claimant's employer, having completed operations at a site close to the claimant's home, commenced work at a new job site more remote. Claimant unsuccessful either to arrange transportation to the new site or to find alternative employment. Umpire held that claimant accepted employment knowing that transportation would be critical to his ability to maintain the employment. Claimant failed in his efforts to meet that critical condition and his employer cannot be held responsible for that.

Decision 38644 Full Text of Decision 38644

Quit his job because claimant and his wife worked at different places, had problems getting to their respective jobs, particularly with a young babysitter and different hours. Umpire stated that the principle is a solid one and of long establishment that it is imperative that an employee is responsible to arrange his own transportation to his job

Decision 26708 Full Text of Decision 26708

Clearly it is the responsibility of any employee to present himself at the workplace and in the absence of clear and specific arrangements between the employer and employee, the difficulty of obtaining transportation is certainly not sufficient to constitute just cause.

Decision 23298 Full Text of Decision 23298

Ss. 28(4) quoted. No one has suggested a reasonable alternative which she had to quitting. She needed to use her car in her job and to do so she needed to get the starter repaired. She could not afford to do so, considering she was being paid $5.25 an hour for 15 hours a week to be reduced to 10.

Decision 20964 Full Text of Decision 20964

Construction worker. Left after 1 day. No means of transportation to the construction site where he had been located. Did not ask anyone for a ride. It was likely transportation could have been arranged with other workers. It was incumbent upon him to arrange for transportation.

Decision 15945 Full Text of Decision 15945

Claimant left after 3 days' work because he ran out of money. The delay by CEIC to determine his eligibility and the delay by welfare authorities to give him the promised transportation assistance are such as to reduce the disqualification from 3 to 1 week.

Decision 14910 Full Text of Decision 14910

10 months of unemployment; lives in Mont-Tremblant at the time; accepts employment with staggered schedule; taxi: $6 to get there, works 2 days at a cost of $24; unable to find any other transportation; change of schedule not possible. Three-week disqualification. Question of fact.

Decision 14847 Full Text of Decision 14847

When his friend quit, claimant was left without transportation to travel 96 miles daily. The Board found that he had not made any serious attempt to secure alternate transportation or temporary accommodation closer. No error of law. Disqualification reduced to minimum of 1 week.

Decision 14105 Full Text of Decision 14105

The Board seems to rely on jurisprudence that neither inconvenience nor travelling time constitute just cause and that transportation is a direct responsibility of the claimant. I disagree. Transportation can be a problem that may justify leaving.

Decision 14026 Full Text of Decision 14026

Moved from Barrie to Angus (12 miles) and family car broke down. Clear that claimant did not have just cause. Had she asked for a leave of absence, it would have been granted. Public transportation available but not adequate. Disqualification reduced to3 weeks.

Decision 13773 Full Text of Decision 13773

It is clear that if one is forced to quit for reasons beyond control, this is with just cause. But distinction to be made between this and transportation difficulties used as an excuse. No evidence of any effort to find private arrangements to enable her to commute. 20 miles.

Decision 13016 Full Text of Decision 13016

Claimant's reasons are by no means trivial, but good cause is not just cause. Not a fair trial: 6 days. No attempt to remedy high commuting costs by asking employer partial reimbursement. No attempt to seek other work. Disqualification reduced from 5 to3 weeks.

Decision 11351 Full Text of Decision 11351

Employee's responsibility to arrange transportation and he was aware of the difficulties when he accepted the job. 20 miles away. Did not exhaust all efforts to make alternate arrangements.

Decision 11175 Full Text of Decision 11175

Waitress lost means of transportation; 15 mile trip. According to board, should have gone to live closer. Nothing in Act requires person to move. No public transport. 6 week disqualification reduced to 1.