| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
working conditions |
salary |
|
Summary:
Umpire decided that the departure was not justified since the decrease in pay was not unilateral, but instead had been negotiated by the employer and the union. FCA confirmed that the consent of the bargaining agent was an important factor in considering justification within the meaning of par. 28(4)(g), but it was not the deciding factor. Therefore, the Umpire’s intervention was not justified since the BOR had taken into account all the circumstances and found that the claimant was justified in leaving because of the decrease in pay.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
significant change in salary |
|
Summary:
Umpire decided that the departure was not justified since the decrease in pay was not unilateral, but instead had been negotiated by the employer and the union. FCA confirmed that the consent of the bargaining agent was an important factor in considering justification within the meaning of par. 28(4)(g), but it was not the deciding factor. Therefore, the Umpire’s intervention was not justified since the BOR had taken into account all the circumstances and found that the claimant was justified in leaving because of the decrease in pay.
