Decision 74580
Full Text of Decision 74580
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant worked for X Québec Inc. from October 19, 2005 to June 10, 2009, when he voluntarily left his employment. According to the claimant, he left his employment to obtain his competency card, which would allow him to work in the construction field. He still has to take a French test and the General Development Test (GDT). According to the Commission, the claimant did not have a guarantee of other employment when he voluntarily left his job. The fact that he started another job eight weeks later does not constitute just cause for voluntarily leaving his employment. The Commission's appeal is allowed by the Umpire.
Decision A0104.07
Full Text of Decision A0104.07
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant had quit his job at a call centre to pursue employment in his field, having a Masters Degree in Civil Engineering. He also argued that the job had been stressful due to customers who degraded him because of his accent and racial origin, that he had to travel to Pakistan for family reasons and that he had a hearing problem in one ear that made his work using a telephone headset difficult. The Court said that the Umpire had applied the wrong test - reasonableness may be "good cause" but it is not "just cause". The current scheme does not allow a claimant to leave their job with the sole view of improving their situation in the market place. While the claimant was successful in finding an engineering job shortly after leaving, it cannot be said that he knew what future employment he would have or the identify of his future employer and as such just cause on the basis provided in subparagraph 29(c)(vi) of the EI Act has not been established. None of the other reasons was accepted by the BOR or the Umpire as the basis for the claimant's decision to leave - the Court was not persuaded that there was any reason to interfere with their findings on that point.
Decision A0021.07
Full Text of Decision A0021.07
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant quit two jobs in Montreal, alleging difficulty in learning French, to move to Toronto where he thought he had better prospects of finding employment in line with a recently obtained diploma. The Court said that the Umpire did not identify the appropriate standard of review, which in a case of voluntary leaving is a question of mixed fact and law. The Court went on to reiterate a number or principles. Despite the myriad of examples provided at section 29(c) of the Act of what would constitute just cause, the primary question remains the same: did the claimant have no reasonable alternative to leaving. Leaving to improve one's position in the marketplace does not constitute just cause. There is no indication that the Board considered the most obvious reasonable alternative - searching for work in Toronto while working in Montreal instead of moving immediately. Moreover, suitability of employment cannot be just cause for leaving.
Decision A0339.06
Full Text of Decision A0339.06
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant, an apprentice electrician, quit his job as a general labourer with a temporary staffing agency contending that he could not continue to work while at the same time be available for work through his union hiring hall. The Umpire was of the view that the BOR was clearly cognizant of the legal test for voluntary leaving - no reasonable alternative to voluntarily leaving - and that it did effectively apply the legal test to the facts of the case in finding that the claimant was not able to be available for employment in his chosen field if he remained employed by the staffing agency. The Court said it was not persuaded that the Umpire made a reviewable error in declining to reverse the decision of the BOR. The Board's reasons indicate that they correctly understood the relevant legal principles and reached a conclusion that was reasonably open to them on the record. (The Commission considers this decision is limited to the particular facts of the case)
Decision 67481
Full Text of Decision 67481
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant voluntarily left his employment at the Privy Council Office in order to take advantage of the potential of a priority appointment in the federal Public Service. The claimant did not succeed in finding a job.
Decision 67526
Full Text of Decision 67526
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Although the claimant in leaving New Brunswick did get short term employment in Sarnia Ontario later in the year there is no evidence in the record that he had previously obtained employment in other regions through the union hall process. There was no offer from a prospective employer or any other contact with a potential employer before the claimant left for Sarnia. The Board's conclusion that the claimant had reasonnable assurance of other employment in the immediate future was not reasonable having regard to the evidence in the record.
Decision 66815
Full Text of Decision 66815
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant quit her position which was a full time job, although not a permanent one. She had been working there for several years. The question is whether the claimant had sufficient assurance of a full time position as a substitute teacher when she quit. The evidence points to a part-time position which is an on-call position when needed.
Decision A-0346.03
Full Text of Decision A-0346.03
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant quit his part-time job without just cause and was laid-off from his full-time job a few weeks later. The Court allowed the appeal saying the claimant had reasons to believe that his full-time employment would continue.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
applicability |
|
Decision A-0123.03
Full Text of Decision A-0123.03
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Without contacting the new employer, the claimant left his employment for possible other employment a friend told him he could get. In referring to the specific legal standard of "reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future", the Court found that there was no "assurance" or "employment", as there was no offer by the prospective employer, no contact between that employer and the claimant and the latter had no idea what the work or the remuneration would be.
Decision 57668
Full Text of Decision 57668
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0346.03
Decision A-0076.02
Full Text of Decision A-0076.02
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The Court found that an offer of employment conditional upon completion of a training course did not meet the criteria of reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
employment |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study |
|
Decision 56049
Full Text of Decision 56049
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
The claimant left a full-time job to take what she knew to be "temporary" employment with Bombardier, a firm she deemed to be more desirable as having more to offer in the long-run in terms of both pay and room for advancement. Held that even though the new position pay was considerably more, the statement "get your foot in the door" is not a reasonable assurance of full-time employment. Her previous position was secure. No just cause proven.
Decision 56252
Full Text of Decision 56252
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0123.03
Decision 53575
Full Text of Decision 53575
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
A person may have just cause to leave a job if he or she has reasonable assurance of finding other employment. Simply leaving a job in the hope of finding something better elsewhere is not enough.
Decision 51838
Full Text of Decision 51838
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Claimant was working 20 hours per week and earning $6/hr. Being unable to provide for his family, claimant quit his job in Newfoundland to look for work in B.C. to seek a better job with higher wages. Held that his decision may have been reasonable but was not justified under the Act. The fact is that while he was working, even only making $6/hr for 20 hours per week, he was making $120 whereas now he is making nothing.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
working conditions |
salary |
|
Decision 47940
Full Text of Decision 47940
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Claimant was working as a bar tender when his father, who had run a barber shop for many years, died. Agreement amongst the family that if claimant became a barber he would have the equipment and the stand. Claimant quit his job and took a barbering course. The BOR stated that the claimant had reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future and that he had quit with just cause. Error in law ruled the Umpire. The claimant's action was immediate but the employment itself required the wait of a period of 24 weeks during the training.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
delay between two jobs |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study |
|
Decision 43296
Full Text of Decision 43296
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Umpire found that, based on the evidence, when the claimant quit his job, he did not have "reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future." On the contrary, he admitted that he did not have any job prospects or promises of employment. He alleged that he was optimistic about finding a job in construction. That is not sufficient to enable a claimant to invoke paragraph 29(c)(vi) of the EIA.
Decision 42538
Full Text of Decision 42538
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
BOR erred in applying a test to show lack of just cause which is more stringent than the statutory test of "reasonable assurance". Statute simply requires clmt to show that he had "reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future".
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
not definite |
|
Decision 39662
Full Text of Decision 39662
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
According to the case law, it is not necessary that a claimant be absolutely certain of finding other employment, but it is important that an employer have actually promised employment to the claimant or given him reasonable assurance of such employment. The mere fact of being informed of opportunities and of having good hope of finding other employment is not sufficient to justify voluntary separation.
Decision A-0765.96
Full Text of Decision A-0765.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Claimant disqualified for having voluntarily left her job without just cause. The BOR dismissed the claimant's appeal since she had not obtained any other employment nor had a reasonable assurance of other employment. Both the Umpire and the FCA summarily dismissed the claimant's appeal.
Decision A-0634.96
Full Text of Decision A-0634.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Claimant disqualified for having left her employment to move to another region. Before the Umpire, claimed to have been assured of another job before quitting. According to the Umpire, it was a personal decision; there was no concrete assurance of another job. Appeal summarily dismissed by the FCA.
Decision A-0175.96
Full Text of Decision A-0175.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
Claimant quit lengthy employment when the severance pay provisions of her collective agreement were threatened by current negotiations. While her resignation was understandable, it was precipitous and the FCA ruled that the claimant had not established "just cause" under s.28 of the Act as she had no reasonable assurance of another employment in the near future or experienced "undue" pressure by the employer to quit.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
undue pressure to quit |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
monetary considerations |
|
Decision A-0599.95
Full Text of Decision A-0599.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
|
Summary:
It cannot be said at the time he resigned his employment on the expectation that he had been admitted to medical school that the applicant has a "reasonable assurance of other employment". Reference made to Tanguay (A-1458-84).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
reasonable circumstance as prescribed |
|
Decision A0444.08
Full Text of Decision A0444.08
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Summary:
The Umpire upheld the ruling by the BOR that stated the claimant was justified in leaving her job to seek better working conditions. The Commission maintained that the members in the majority had erred in fact and in law when they concluded that the claimant had shown just cause within the meaning of the Act to leave her job. The Commission maintained that the BOR had failed to consider the fact that the claimant had left a permanent job to accept one that did not guarantee permanence and that had essentially resulted in unemployment. The Commission maintained that the BOR should consider the issue of the amount of time remaining in the job prior to the end of the school year and the resulting loss of employment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| proof |
errors in law |
burden of proof |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Decision A0518.08
Full Text of Decision A0518.08
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Summary:
The claimant had a permanent part-time job as a gas station attendant. He was paid $8 an hour for 15 to 20 hours of work per week. He left that job for another seasonal job in construction that guaranteed him 150 hours of work at $18.60 per hour. During his work term at his new job, he accumulated 184 hours of insurable employment between October 8 and November 23, 2007. The Board of Referees concluded that the claimant was justified in leaving his job to accept another one in a field where he could improve his financial situation. According to the FCA, in the Langlois case, reasonable assurance of another job in the immediate future must be assessed in relation to all the circumstances surrounding the claimant's departure. In the case of a seasonal job, the moment at which the voluntary leave occurs and the duration of the seasonal job are the most important circumstances to consider in determining whether the leave was a reasonable solution and therefore justified. This decision reaffirms the fact that a worker's desire to improve his/her financial situation cannot be accepted as a justification for voluntarily leaving the original job.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Decision 70481
Full Text of Decision 70481
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Summary:
The claimant quit her permanent employment to start a seasonal job. The Umpire ruled that the Board of Referees confused the concepts of "legitimacy" and "only reasonable alternative" when it determined that voluntarily leaving her employment constituted the claimant's only reasonable alternative because she had a reasonable assurance of other employment in the immediate future. The Board failed to take into account the consequences of the claimant's decision to leave her regular employment for seasonal employment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Decision A0075.07
Full Text of Decision A0075.07
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
Summary:
This case involves a claimant who quit indeterminate permanent employment in August for seasonal permanent employment at much higher wages expecting to last until December. The claimant applied for benefit when laid off in October. The Court said that in such a case the timing of the voluntary leaving and the expected duration of the seasonal employment are the most important circumstances to consider in determining whether the leaving was a reasonable alternative. Leaving to take seasonal employment when the work season is ending and with no expectation that the requalification conditions of section 30 of the EI Act could be met creates an unjustified certainty of unemployment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
other employment |
Seasonal Employment |
