| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
job search |
warning before disentitlement |
|
Summary:
Claimant was told that she could not use the word "prefer", so wrote the condition down as a restriction. Not proper to disentitle without first warning her that too restrictive a search may affect her right. If problem with claim, she has a right to bethe first to know.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
restrictions |
labour market information |
|
Summary:
It is well established that a Commission allegation of non-availability must be supported by labour market information showing few or no chances of employment with the restriction. No such evidence here . [p. 5]
