Decision A0145.11
Full Text of Decision A0145.11
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
|
|
Summary:
Employees of Tembec applied for regular benefits but their applications were denied by the Commission on the basis that there was an ongoing labour dispute. According to s. 36(1) of the EIA, a claimant is not entitled to receive EI benefits when he or she loses or is unable to resume employment due to a work stoppage attributable to a labour dispute. Prior to the hearings before the Umpire, the Commission advised the Umpire and the claimants, that it recommended that the claimants’ appeals be allowed. The issue before the FCA was whether Tembec’s rights to natural justice or procedural fairness have been infringed. In a majority decision, the FCA found that the employer can appeal “as of right” to the Umpire, and that the employer is an interested party within contemplation. Therefore, Tembec was entitled to notice of all decisions and was entitled to receive a copy of the appeal docket prepared by the Commission which was filed with the Umpire.
Decision 63398
Full Text of Decision 63398
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was disentitled from benefits three days per week because she had stopped working at her part-time employment due to a labour dispute. The umpire ruled that the work performed by the claimant was covered by the collective agreement and the fact she refused to perform picket duty did not in any way change her participation or the interest she had in the outcome of the dispute. The umpire concluded that to say section 36 of the Employment Insurance Act did not apply was an error of fact and in law.
Decision 40320
Full Text of Decision 40320
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
|
|
Summary:
BOR deemed that the clmt, who is a member of an international union, had no interest in the labour dispute because he belonged to the industrial sector and only the residential sector was subject to the decree. Umpire found that BOR erred in failing to apply the conditions of the Act. Clmt was directly interested in the dispute since he belonged to the union and financed it through his own contributions.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for exemption |
|
|
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
Decision A-0825.95
Full Text of Decision A-0825.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
construction trade decree |
|
Summary:
Umpire reproached BOR for having mistakenly dissociated the stoppage of work for construction employees in Quebec from the dispute between employers and employees that had been going on for several months regarding the terms of their future agreement. He did not accept the fact that the members of the BOR could come to such a conclusion based on the argument that the Minister’s intervention in the form of Bill 142 exacerbated the situation. Umpire saw the Minister’s intervention as one incident in the conflict, a way to resolve the impasse, a step in finding a solution to the employer-employee dispute. He did not agree that, because the Bill triggered the stoppage of work, it could be viewed as independent of the labour dispute. FCA upheld the Umpire’s decision and found that Umpire did not in any way deviate from the concept of dispute referred to in the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
attributable to dispute |
|
Decision 22901
Full Text of Decision 22901
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
construction trade decree |
|
Summary:
Foreman laid off. Because of the labour dispute, he did not have anyone to supervise. He belonged to a union (CSD) that was not taking part in the negotiations. He was a unionized employee governed by the Construction Decree, and therefore might derive a benefit from the settlement of the dispute.
Decision A-0657.79
Full Text of Decision A-0657.79
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
contracting out |
|
Summary:
According to Umpire, insured was only indirectly interested, as he was employed by a subcontractor, even though subcontracting was one of the points in issue. Umpire erred in law, since the insured's situation was the same as in PELLETIER.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
Decision A-0305.79
Full Text of Decision A-0305.79
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
contracting out |
|
Summary:
Case identical to CUB-5363 with which Umpire stated he agreed: since subcontracting was the main point in issue, the insured was directly interested. We are of the opinion that the Umpire did not err in law.
Decision 28095
Full Text of Decision 28095
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
dual status |
|
Summary:
Shareholder in a business which employs him, and which ceases operations as a result of a work stoppage by unionized employees. Held that he falls under section 31, and that he is directly interested in the dispute, as a shareholder and moreover as a negotiator during the dispute.
Decision 12974
Full Text of Decision 12974
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
dual status |
|
Summary:
Management employee and at same time shareholder of company that employed him. It appears that question of work by members of co-owners' families was subject of union demand. He was one of co-owners.
Decision 11611
Full Text of Decision 11611
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
dual status |
|
Summary:
Employed where another union had jurisdiction. Paid union dues to own union and work dues to other union. Required to join other union during lockout. There is no question he did benefit from dispute because he was called back to work.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
strike or lockout |
|
Decision 09752
Full Text of Decision 09752
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
dual status |
|
Summary:
Shareholders ordering lock-out and therefore ceasing to work in the company as welders. Subject to same conditions as unionized welders.
Decision 71732
Full Text of Decision 71732
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Section 36 of the Act states that a person who experiences a work stoppage as result of a labour dispute is not entitled to receive benefits unless he or she meets certain criteria. Section 36(4) of the Act stipulate that, this section does not apply if a claimant proves that the claimant is not participating in, financing or directly interested in the labour dispute that caused the stoppage of work. To be exempt from the application of the Act, claimants must prove that they are not participating in, financing or «indirectly interested» in the labour dispute. The expression «indirectly interested» means that claimants must show that, if they return to work following the dispute, they cannot access any earnings or benefits obtained as a result of the dispute. The fourth criterion is speculative, but clearly sets out that the claimant, who may benefit from a new collective agreement in the future, cannot be exempt from the application of section 36 of the Act. The appeal is dismissed.
Decision 35831
Full Text of Decision 35831
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Although only a 6 week contract, claimant not entitled to benefits from the date on which the strike commenced because she did have a direct interest in the strike until the date of the expiration of her contract.
Decision 26330
Full Text of Decision 26330
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Teacher on strike from 8-5-91, contract expiring end of 6-91. No picket line during summer. Strike terminated 2-9-91. A few teachers resigned, so claimant got a new contract from 12-9-91. HURREN and CUB 18076 quoted. Indirect interest following expiration of contract.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision 22996
Full Text of Decision 22996
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Jurisprudence makes clear that merely receiving an increase in wages after a strike does not mean that a non-union worker is directly interested in a labour dispute when the increase is completely within the discretion of the employer and there is no continuing right of the employee to employment.
Decision A-0594.91
Full Text of Decision A-0594.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Temporary workers discharged without right of recall on the eve of a legal strike by permanent workers. The Umpire did not err in concluding that the claimants were exempted from disentitlement to benefit by ss. 31(2).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision 21353
Full Text of Decision 21353
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Dismissed during stoppage: disobeyed injunction and assaulted guard. Employer not interested in re-hiring but possibility of negotiations during back-to-work protocol. CUB-14636 applies; authentic and non-definitive breach; remains party to the conflict.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
regularly engaged |
definition |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision 19771
Full Text of Decision 19771
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0594.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
Decision 15562
Full Text of Decision 15562
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Claimant dismissed due to misconduct during lockout. HURREN examined. One single most important fact is claimant's desire to be reinstated. Grievance filed against dismissal. It cannot be said that claimant does not retain any direct interest under 31(2).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
regularly engaged |
definition |
|
Decision 14021
Full Text of Decision 14021
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0741.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision A-0741.87
Full Text of Decision A-0741.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
As for the possibility a substitute teacher might have to teach again after the stoppage, such interest would be anything but direct, said the Umpire. Upheld by FC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision 14679
Full Text of Decision 14679
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Claimant dismissed for misconduct. As proposed settlement of dispute involved claimant's reinstatement and as employer did not rule out his reinstatement it must be said that he was directly interested.
Decision 14636
Full Text of Decision 14636
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
In order to determine whether 31(2) applies, the CEIC submitted that the Board would have to find that claimant's severance from employment was full, final and absolute. Even if that is but another way of describing how 31(2) can apply, I prefer the exposition in HURREN. [p._8]
Claimant locked out 1-1 and then terminated 6-2 due to actions on picket line. Grievance filed and rejected. Union intends to negotiate dismissal prior to resuming activities. HURREN distinguished. Continues to be directly interested.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision 13738
Full Text of Decision 13738
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Employee whose contract was expected to terminate during the strike. The retroactive increase does not help us. In either case, this was merely a windfall in consideration of past services, which is not even considered to be earnings under reg. 57(3)(e). [p. 7]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision A-0942.85
Full Text of Decision A-0942.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
A disentitlement which has come into being under 31(1) continues until (a) or (b) applies. This does not exclude the possibility of it becoming inapplicable by reason of claimant subsequently proving 31(2). This is not contrary to the policy of the Act.
Truly retired during strike. It was argued that he might have an eventual interest in the settlement should he decide to return. Assuming that such interest was different from that of the public at large, it would not be "direct" within 31(2).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
duration |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| federal court |
reasons for judgment not stated |
interpretation |
|
Decision 11403
Full Text of Decision 11403
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0942.85
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
duration |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| federal court |
reasons for judgment not stated |
interpretation |
|
Decision 55320
Full Text of Decision 55320
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Summary:
The BOR erred in only taking into consideration the position the claimant was working in at the time of the work stoppage, i.e. in a non-bargaining unit. It could not ignore the facts that he was a due-paying member of the bargaining unit, that he was therefore participating in as well as financing the labour dispute through his dues and, most importantly, the fact that he was directly interested in the outcome and did in fact ripe some benefits, including some benefits on retirement.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
definition |
|
Decision 52514
Full Text of Decision 52514
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Summary:
The claimant had to pay union dues, even while on probation. He did not receive strike pay from his union. He was directly interested in the results of the bargaining since he obtained permanent status and received monetary and other benefits included in the new collective agreement. Failed to prove that he was not participating in, financing or directly interested in the labour dispute.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
Decision 51828
Full Text of Decision 51828
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Summary:
Claimant lost his job because of a labour dispute at his place of work. He is not unionized, but belongs to the bargaining unit. He has had to pay union dues since he started, but is not protected until he has worked 750 hours. Considered to be at least indirectly funding the dispute as well as affected by the outcome of the strike. The precariousness of the job referred to by the claimant would not affect the actual existence of his job.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
Decision 16770
Full Text of Decision 16770
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Summary:
The direct interest exists regardless of the amount of monetary benefit. It is illogical to say that there is no direct interest because the benefits will not be implemented until after the employees return to work.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Decision 14585
Full Text of Decision 14585
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Summary:
The Board said that claimant, a casual worker, benefited from previous negotiations. The language of s.31 speaks of the present in referring to the labour dispute and claimant's interest is clearly envisaged as being direct rather than indirect. [p._8]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Decision A-0511.97
Full Text of Decision A-0511.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
many unions |
|
Summary:
As a member of the office employees union, the claimant was found to be directly interested in the strike by employees of the production employees union against the same employer. The claimant alleged that the only employees "directly interested" in the labour dispute were those whose conditions of employment were automatically determined or modified by the outcome of the dispute. Claimant’s allegations summarily rejected by the FCA. For more details, consult summaries indexed under CUB 37885.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for exemption |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
attributable to dispute |
|
Decision A-0512.97
Full Text of Decision A-0512.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
many unions |
|
Summary:
Case identical to A-0511.97. See summary indexed under this reference number.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for exemption |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
attributable to dispute |
|
Decision 37885
Full Text of Decision 37885
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
many unions |
|
Summary:
Stoppage of work attributable to a labour dispute. Three unions involved, but all under the CSN. The collective agreements all expired at the same time. Umpire found that, despite the fact that security and clerical staff were legally members of another unit of the same union, they could not circumvent section 31. The claims were the same in several regards; the benefits granted were partially the same and everyone was waiting for the main dispute to be resolved to sign their own collective agreement.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for exemption |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
attributable to dispute |
|
Decision A-0552.00
Full Text of Decision A-0552.00
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
There was evidence indicating that Local 15 might well have expected to receive whatever benefits were negociated by Local 1004. Not only had the two Locals coordinated their bargaining, but Local 15 decided to postpone its ratification vote pending Local 1004's vote on its tentative agreement, no doubt in the expectation that, if Local 1004 accepted the City's improved offer, its members would be offered similar terms. Locals had considered their interests and their issues with the employer sufficiently similar that they had wanted to bargain together.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Decision 48786
Full Text of Decision 48786
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Although Local 15 is not directly involved in the dispute (Local 1004 was on strike), a tentative deal in collective bargaining had been reached. Local 15 however has not ratified the terms of the settlement. By postponing the ratification vote, Local 15 potentially stands to gain if Local 1004 secures a different settlement. Local 15 therefore is now bearing some of the burden of Local 1004's strike action.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Decision 48815
Full Text of Decision 48815
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Labour dispute between the union and the employer where the claimant is not a union member. The employer says that, whatever bargain was made with the union, it would not necessarily be passed on to the claimant and other non-union members. Furthermore, the employer would negotiate a separate contract with the non-union members on a one-to-one basis. A determination on the individual facts of this situation leads to the conclusion that the interest was not direct.
Decision 22950
Full Text of Decision 22950
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Non-union, part-time, casual relief workers found to be not directly interested in the dispute even though their employer, a hospital, chose to increase their wages after a new wage settlement was concluded with the unionized workers, a matter of discretion unilaterally determined by each hospital.
Decision 23033
Full Text of Decision 23033
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
I agree with CUB 12900 that any interest the claimant had in the labour dispute because of a potential increase in wages could only be indirect since any increase ultimately depended, not on the settlement negotiated with the Union but upon the unilateral discretionary decision of the employer.
Decision 16770
Full Text of Decision 16770
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Local 550, hourly paid workers, went on strike. Claimant, a clerical worker, belonged to Local 555 whose labour agreement stated that any changes negotiated by 550 would apply to 555. This in fact resulted in an increase in pension plan and life insurance. PRESHO referred to.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Decision 15114
Full Text of Decision 15114
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
IWA on strike against company. Claimant is a member of a different local and is employed by a sub-contractor. Whatever advantages IWA gained for its members would presumably be extended to all locals even though claimant's employer is not in group bargaining.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
picket lines |
|
Decision 14021
Full Text of Decision 14021
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0741.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision A-0741.87
Full Text of Decision A-0741.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
As for class sizes, this is at most an indirect benefit to a substitute teacher, whose work load coincides with that of regular teacher only because her occupation requires that she take over their classes for short periods. Not directly interested. FC agrees with Umpire.
Substitute teacher whose 20 days' sick leave per year are required by Ontario legislation. The fact that it appears in collective agreement is irrelevant. Striking union not authorized to bargain on their behalf for a change. Merely at the whim of employer. FC agrees with Umpire.
Substitute teachers not covered by collective agreement. They are paid whatever employer chooses which, in recent years, happens to be the same amount as regular teachers. School board under no obligation to abide by this figure. Analogous to CUB 12900. FC agrees with Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 13040
Full Text of Decision 13040
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
Even if there is no obligation on the part of the school board to pay the claimant the union negotiated rate, the fact that, as a matter of practice, it paid such rate to non union employees would be sufficient to find a direct interest.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
part-time workers |
|
Decision 12900
Full Text of Decision 12900
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
non-bargaining group |
|
Summary:
College's policy to base pay scale of sessional teachers on pay scale negotiated by union for regular teachers. This is not direct interest, but rather indirect. Not required to maintain parity. Separate agreement. Issue was workload and not pay scale.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
Decision A-0559.81
Full Text of Decision A-0559.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
on leave |
|
Summary:
Claimant, a teacher on maternity leave, remained directly interested because benefits obtained for teachers would accrue to her upon resumption of duties following the end of her leave. [p.10]. The Umpire did not err in law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
regularly engaged |
maternity |
|
Decision 15967
Full Text of Decision 15967
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
Summary:
By virtue of his membership in a union and the grades and classes on strike, claimant is unable to prove he had no direct interest. The terms and conditions of his employment were in fact under negotiation, and Umpires have ruled that, in such a case, direct interest is present.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
hired due to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
Decision 14236
Full Text of Decision 14236
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
Summary:
Dispute over fish quality control. 32 walked out in the afternoon. Returned to work next day. All employees locked out including 68 workers and claimant who had not walked out. Direct interest found to exist as his working conditions could have been directly affected.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
Decision 13591
Full Text of Decision 13591
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
Summary:
Hired for 4 months commencing 18-2 and locked out 26-2. It was apparent that he was directly interested in the dispute. His salary was one of the items being negotiated and he experienced a wage increase when the dispute terminated.
Decision 12102
Full Text of Decision 12102
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
Summary:
A person is directly interested if he or she will benefit directly from the dispute in terms of advantages in bargaining; benefit of having strike end to get job back means indirect interest; legislation refers to direct interest. [pp. 14-15]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
definition |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision A-1198.82
Full Text of Decision A-1198.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
Summary:
Union to which employees of contractor belonged on strike against company and certified during strike. They had direct interest in the dispute since change to their working conditions was one of the issues. Application for leave dismissed by SC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
different employer |
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
Decision A-0594.91
Full Text of Decision A-0594.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Temporary workers discharged without right of recall on the eve of a legal strike by permanent workers. The mere possibility of recall at the discretion of the employer is not sufficient to constitute a direct interest. Recalled under new contract a few weeks after the strike.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 19771
Full Text of Decision 19771
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0594.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 18487
Full Text of Decision 18487
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
He paid no union dues only because he had not served the 30-day mandatory qualifying working period. His job was one of those for which the union negotiated. In fact the union negotiated a raise which he was paid when recalled even though it was only for a few days.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Decision 16434
Full Text of Decision 16434
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Probationary worker who was recalled after the strike, joined the union and benefitted from improvements won. As was held in CUB 11611, a claimant who is not a union member is directly interested in a dispute if he stands to benefit once the dispute ends.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
shortly after commencing |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Decision 14328
Full Text of Decision 14328
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Electrician from another province who returned to work following a 3-week strike. It may be assumed that he will benefit from any gains obtained by the striking electricians. [p. 6]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Decision 12102
Full Text of Decision 12102
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
A person is directly interested if he or she will benefit directly from the dispute in terms of advantages in bargaining; benefit of having strike end to get job back equals indirect interest; legislation refers to direct interest. [pp. 14-15]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
premises |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
own conditions at issue |
|
| labour dispute |
participation |
definition |
|
Decision 11611
Full Text of Decision 11611
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Employed where another union had jurisdiction. Paid union dues to own union and work dues to other union. Required to join other union during lockout. There is no question he did benefit from dispute because he was called back to work.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
strike or lockout |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
dual status |
|
Decision 09801
Full Text of Decision 09801
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Summary:
Probationary worker hired the day following the strike vote and 3 days before the strike. When she returned after the strike, she received, as did other accounting clerks, an increased wage rate as a result of the settlement which terminated the strike.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Decision 68129
Full Text of Decision 68129
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
The evidence has established that the claimant suffered a work stoppage due to a labour dispute. Had it not been for that dispute, he would have continued to work, for some time at least, and when it ended he resumed his job. There is no question that the conditions of disentitlement stipulated in section 36(1) of the Act applied to the claimant. Furthermore, the claimant did not satisfy the exceptions to disentitlement provided for in section 36(4) of the Act. Although he was on probation, he participated in the financing of the strike through the union dues he had to pay and he was directly interested in the dispute since he benefited from the new collective agreement once the dispute was settled. See simlar decision, CUB 68099.
Decision 52514
Full Text of Decision 52514
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
The claimant had to pay union dues, even while on probation. He did not receive strike pay from his union. He was directly interested in the results of the bargaining since he obtained permanent status and received monetary and other benefits included in the new collective agreement. Failed to prove that he was not participating in, financing or directly interested in the labour dispute.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
Decision 34694
Full Text of Decision 34694
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Temporary employee on probation. Work stoppage due to a dispute. Interested in settling the dispute. Following settlement, the insured person received a wage increase and other benefits. There were also disadvantages resulting from the agreement, such as working Saturdays.
Decision 25474
Full Text of Decision 25474
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Union worker who, during strike, accepts temporary employment (as replacement) some distance away. Same union but different local. Premises struck while claimant on probation. No seniority rights, no recall or benefit rights. Any recall was completely at the discretion of the employer.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
participation |
by union |
|
Decision A-0594.91
Full Text of Decision A-0594.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Temporary workers discharged without right of recall on the eve of a legal strike by permanent workers. The mere possibility of recall at the discretion of the employer is not sufficient to constitute a direct interest. Recalled under new contract a few weeks after the strike.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 19892
Full Text of Decision 19892
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Probationary worker laid off due to the strike 1 day before. His layoff continued after the strike. The Commission argued that he had a direct interest in the outcome of the dispute and that this was shown when he received retroactive pay. Upheld by Board. No error of law.
Decision 19771
Full Text of Decision 19771
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0594.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
employment terminates |
|
Decision 19062
Full Text of Decision 19062
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Although the claimant was not in the union, he was a probationary employee and his position was within the bargaining unit which the union had authority to represent. This difference clearly distinguishes his situation from that of COLE. [p._7]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
terminates during strike |
|
Decision 18487
Full Text of Decision 18487
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
He paid no union dues only because he had not served the 30-day mandatory qualifying working period. His job was one of those for which the union negotiated. In fact the union negotiated a raise which he was paid when recalled even though it was only for a few days.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision 16434
Full Text of Decision 16434
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Probationary worker who was recalled after the strike, joined the union and benefitted from improvements won. As was held in CUB 11611, a claimant who is not a union member is directly interested in a dispute if he stands to benefit once the dispute ends.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
shortly after commencing |
|
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision 15795
Full Text of Decision 15795
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
It is possible that the working conditions improved after the strike since the collective agreement includes the wage scale for students. But a student hired for a few months, such as casual laborers, is not directly affected in the long term.
Decision 14585
Full Text of Decision 14585
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
The Board said that claimant benefited from previous negotiations. The language of s.31 speaks of the present in referring to the labour dispute and claimant's interest is clearly envisaged as being direct rather than indirect. [p. 8]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
in the future |
|
Decision 14328
Full Text of Decision 14328
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Electrician from another province who returned to work following a 3-week strike. It may be assumed that he will benefit from any gains obtained by the striking electricians. [p. 6]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
Decision 09801
Full Text of Decision 09801
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
temporary, probationary |
|
Summary:
Probationary worker hired the day following the strike vote and 3 days before the strike. When she returned after the strike, she received, as did other accounting clerks, an increased wage rate as a result of the settlement which terminated the strike.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
directly interested |
recall after stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
