| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| parental benefits |
arrival at home |
|
|
Summary:
Claimant's baby was placed in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for 3 months and claimant was unable to take her daughter home until Jan. 8, 2001. Submitted she should be given 35 weeks, not 10 weeks. Argued that the legislation should be interpreted in the same way that the legislation is interpreted for adoptive parents. The triggering event for an adoption is the day the child is placed in the adoptive parent's hands and since her baby was released from the hospital on Jan. 8, 2001, she should be entitled to 35 weeks. Argument rejected. The language of the legislation is clear. The triggering event for entitlement to 35 weeks of parental leave is the birth of the child, not when the child was placed in the parent's hands.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| parental benefits |
maximum payable |
|
|
Summary:
The scheduled due date of the claimant's baby was January 19, 2001 but she arrived prematurely on October 12, 2000 and she was placed in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for 3 months. Claimant submitted that since she was unable to take her daughter home until Jan. 8, 2001, she should be given 35 weeks of parental benefits, not 10 weeks. Argument rejected. The triggering event for entitlement to 35 weeks of parental leave is the birth of the child, not when the child was placed in the parent's hands.
