| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
computation |
|
Summary:
Claimant challenged the fact that the Commission had taken into account his part-time employment in calculating his benefit rate and total number of weeks of insurable employment since he had only taken the job as a favour. Umpire stated that the Act does not distinguish between part-time and full-time employment, nor does it make a distinction between a job done as a favour and a regular job. Umpire thus found that the calculation was in accordance with the Act.
