| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
control of working hours |
|
|
Summary:
Car salesman who cannot attend at dealership at times other than those open to customers, also subject to alternate lunch hours. The Board found claimant controlled his working hours. There was sufficient evidence to reach such conclusion.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
full working week |
|
|
Summary:
One of the threshold requirements for entitlement to benefits is that one be unemployed. An employee [car salesman] who is working 40 hours per week is clearly working a full working week.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
commission salespersons |
|
|
Summary:
It is well established that remuneration is only one of the factors to examine. Here, claimant worked 40 hours per week, the same amount of time that he worked at that same employment [selling car] prior to being denied draws on commissions.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
principal means of livelihood |
|
|
Summary:
The test to apply under 43(2) is an objective one: is the employment itself normally pursued as a principal means of livelihood? Individuals who devote as much time [as 40 hours a week] to the sale of cars normally follow that employment as livelihood.
