Decision 21694
| Case Number | Claimant | Judge | Language | Decision date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decision 21694 | Reed | English | 1992-09-23 |
| Decision | Appealed | Appellant | Corresponding Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allowed | No | N/A | - |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue 1: | Sub-Issue 2: | Sub-Issue 3: |
|---|---|---|---|
| voluntarily leaving employment | new employment | not definite |
Summary:
Was offered work elsewhere at a much higher wage. The CEIC argues that the UI fund should not be expected to bear the cost of one moving from permanent to casual work so as to potentially earn more in the long run. However she did not expect to have to apply for UI when she left.