Decision 53566
Full Text of Decision 53566
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
The claimant, who was not affected by the temporary layoff (for about two months) due to his seniority, opted for the voluntary temporary layoff on his own volition. That was a personal decision, and the generosity a more senior employee offers to a younger colleague cannot prevent the Act from being strictly applied.
Decision 45806
Full Text of Decision 45806
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant alleged that departure was part of a workforce reduction program; BOR agreed. Error of law, according to the Umpire. An explicit piece of evidence on record indicates that the employer's policy of encouraging retirement did not have the effect of protecting the other employees' jobs. In addition, the employer confirmed that no one would have been laid off, even if no employee had accepted the offer made.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
workforce reduction |
|
Decision 45745
Full Text of Decision 45745
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
As per a clause in the union agreement, claimant accepted to leave his employment for what he termed "inverse seniority". Commission ruled that claimant was on a voluntary layoff and that the termination did not constitute just cause. At the BOR hearing, claimant alleged that the Reg. applicable to a "workforce reduction process" should apply. Request denied and decision maintained by Umpire who found that the strict requirements of the Regulation were not met.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
workforce reduction |
|
Decision 39960
Full Text of Decision 39960
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant did not examine the alternatives available to him and implications when he voluntered to be laid off. Had he done so, the employer would have retained his services. That is one of "all of the circumstances" which must be taken into account when determining he he had just cause for voluntary leaving and having others to bear the burden of his unemployment.
Decision 29307
Full Text of Decision 29307
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant is one of the 5 organizers of the company who each hold 20% of the shares and all are directors. In his capacity of president and general manager, he laid himself off and applied for UI. He volunteered to lay himself off instead of one of the 5 employees left during the winter season.
Decision 29011
Full Text of Decision 29011
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Due to a decline in business the employer was forced to lay off employees. People with more seniority were given the option of being laid off first. I direct the Commission to further pursue with the employer the possibility of documenting the elements of a workforce reduction under reg. 56.1.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
workforce reduction |
|
Decision 26406
Full Text of Decision 26406
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Having the most seniority in his category, the claimant could only be laid off if he presented a written request, which had to be approved by the company. He not only sacrificed the protection guaranteed to him by his seniority, but he also asked not to work.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
layoff requested |
|
Decision 25301
Full Text of Decision 25301
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
In signing the request for layoff despite his seniority right that allowed him to be transferred to another department, as the employer was indeed prepared to do, it was the claimant himself who took the initiative of terminating his employment without just cause.
Decision 22031
Full Text of Decision 22031
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant concluded that it was the wise decision for her not to displace another nurse but to accept a lay-off and wait for her position to re-open. No evidence that the position would re-open. I must conclude that, by having decided not to bump a less senior nurse, she decided to voluntarily quit.
Decision 21947
Full Text of Decision 21947
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
In accordance with the collective agreement, if a lay-off is anticipated, a more senior employee may elect either to be laid off with rights to recall after 3 or 6 months, or to remain at work while a person with less seniority would be sent home. Claimant opted for the lay-off.
Decision 21398
Full Text of Decision 21398
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
It is not disputed that the business was obliged to cut expenditures. Claimant was given the choice as to whether he continued through the winter on reduced hours and pay or whether he quit. He himself said that he chose to stop because he would make more on UI.
Decision 20933
Full Text of Decision 20933
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Hired with the understanding that he would only work during the bedding plant season and thereafter would be leaving to pursue his music career. It was his intention from the outset to work for the nursery only during the season and the employer and he did have such an agreement.
Decision 20110
Full Text of Decision 20110
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Barring exceptional circumstances, to accept voluntary layoff rather than choose to remain on the job and bump another employee must be considered voluntarily leaving without just cause. The argument that someone would be laid off and benefits would have to be paid is dismissed.
Had the claimants elected to remain on the job for the summer months, their positions were not available. They would have had to accept less desirable positions, unrelated to their normal jobs. As per CUB 4671, they had just cause for leaving.
Decision 18058
Full Text of Decision 18058
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Both decisions make no assessment of whether claimant's decision to elect voluntary lay-off was made with "just cause". They merely find that he voluntary left his employment. This is an error of law.
In such circumstances there is more justification for one imposing the burden of his unemployment on the UI system than is the case where a vacancy in the employer's work force is created. This alone is not just cause but must be weighed amongst other factors.
The context was one in which the employer was laying off a large percentage of its work force. What is labelled a voluntary lay-off is really more of a lay-off selection process. Factors to consider: differences in conditions, remoteness from residence,probable length of job.
Acceptance of voluntary lay-off in this case is not the same as the voluntary leaving employment in a situation where an unfilled vacancy in the employer's work force is thereby created. Someone was going to be unemployed, either claimant or a co-worker.
The fact that there is a possibility that a job may be of short duration or not available when one arrives, because of bumping by someone else, is not enough for just cause. However, a significant probability that this is the case would be a significantfactor.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
commuting |
distance too great |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Decision 18062
Full Text of Decision 18062
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Ss.40(1) quoted with emphasis on "since the interruption of earnings". The facts disclose that claimant was employed at the time in question. He declined to accept alternate employment. He opted for voluntary lay-off status. Ss.41(1) might have been applicable, not 40(1).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
preceding the interruption of earnings |
|
|
Decision 17001
Full Text of Decision 17001
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Railway gang labourer who could exercise his option to be laid off when work completed for winter and no work available within 50 miles. This is not voluntarily leaving. Each case to be decided on its own facts, not unlike cases of "suitability of employment".
Decision 16183
Full Text of Decision 16183
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
The right to recall does not constitue employment. This is in fact refusal to apply for a job and not voluntary termination. The Board and the judge can only rule on the decision rendered and not on that which CEIC could have or should have made.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
decision not to reconsider |
|
Decision 15804
Full Text of Decision 15804
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Case law is clear; Section 41 still applies to an insured individual who is laid off when he could have maintained his employment because of seniority. Wanting to provide some advantage to colleagues is not sufficient. Disqualification reduced to 3 weeks.
Decision 15590
Full Text of Decision 15590
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
An agreement with his supervisor regarding whether he quit or was laid off does not change the fact that claimant approached the employer and asked to be let go.
Decision 11682A
Full Text of Decision 11682A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Principle of just cause in case of early retirement as stated in TANGUAY and CREW also applies in case of lay-off according to reverse seniority system. Legislation applies to individual before community. Disqualification reduced to 2 weeks.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
layoff requested |
|
Decision 11894
Full Text of Decision 11894
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Layoff list posted for signature by which employees can elect to be among those laid off. Then laid off by inverse seniority. Held not available for work. Disqualification for voluntary leaving not at issue.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| sickness benefits |
otherwise available |
|
|
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
layoff requested |
|
Decision 11494
Full Text of Decision 11494
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
Summary:
Mining company offering compensation to encourage employees to accept lay-offs. Would not have done if it had known consequences for benefits.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
altruistic considerations |
|
