Decision 17526
| Case Number | Claimant | Judge | Language | Decision date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decision 17526 | Martin | English | 1990-01-04 |
| Decision | Appealed | Appellant | Corresponding Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dismissed | No | N/A | - |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue 1: | Sub-Issue 2: | Sub-Issue 3: |
|---|---|---|---|
| earnings | vacation pay | by reason of lay-off or separation |
Summary:
Claimant argues the monies should have been allocated between 5-7 and 13-9 when, having been laid off, he went on vacation. The amount was payable in respect of his layoff on 25-12, not in respect of any specific vacation period. Clearly governed by reg. 58(13)(b).