Summary of Issue: Imposed To Employer

Decision 73144 Full Text of Decision 73144

The claimant filed a claim for benefits on October 12, 2005. The Commission later determined that the claimant did not work for this employer and that the employer made false or misleading statements by issuing a false Record of Employment to the claimant. The Commission imposed a penalty to the employer. The Commission's representative indicated that the claimant received eleven "convenience Records of Employment" and that Revenue Canada determined that all of these employments were not insurable employments. The employer¿s appeal is dismissed by the Umpire

Decision 68141B Full Text of Decision 68141B

The employer issued records of employment to two claimants so that they would receive EI Benefits while continuing to work without pay. See also CUB 68140B.

Decision 68701 Full Text of Decision 68701

The employer, Masco, filed 13 false ROEs. Following an exhaustive investigation, the Commission found the employer to have knowingly made false or misleading representations on behalf of a number of claimants. A penalty in the amount of $45,600.00 was imposed under s. 39 of the EI Act.

Decision A-0547.01 Full Text of Decision A-0547.01

The Commission determined that the employer had issued a false record of employment, for which he incurred a penalty. The Federal Court of Appeal found that the records contained evidence in support of the Commission's and the BOR's conclusion, and reaffirmed that Umpires cannot substitute their appreciation of the facts and of the witnesses' credibility for that of the Board.

Decision 57103 Full Text of Decision 57103

Employer issued false Record of Employment. Penalty of $4,000 imposed. With no reason, the Board of Referees reduced the penalty to $1,000. Decision overturned by the Umpire who stated that the Board had exceeded its jurisdiction. Referred to FCA decisions in Martin, A 1001.92 and Cou Lai, A 0525.97.

Decision 53095 Full Text of Decision 53095

Penalty of $1,239 imposed to the employer for having given a false and misleading statement. He told the Commission to have done that to protect an employee who was having all kind of difficulties. Held that his motives in providing the false information might have been well intended but it remains that the employer knowingly gave false or misleading information.

Decision 52349 Full Text of Decision 52349

Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0547.01

Decision 46081 Full Text of Decision 46081

Penalty of $21,063 (17 false statements X 3 times the benefit rate established at $413) imposed for issuance of false Records of Employment. The BOR, without explanation, held that one time the rate was sufficient. Error of law according to the Umpire. The BOR substituted its discretion for that of the Commission without establishing that the Commission had not exercised its discretion in a judicial manner and had acted arbitrarily, without any basis in established fact.

Decision 43838 Full Text of Decision 43838

Penalty of $12,000 imposed on employer for issuing a false Record of Employment. The Commission took into account the fact that no extenuating circumstances had been shown that could have enabled it to consider any kind of reduction. Appeal dismissed.

Decision 40975 Full Text of Decision 40975

Penalty imposed on employer for having made five false statements. The family business was having major financial problems, so the family members agreed to have their wages suspended but continued to carry out their usual duties while receiving benefits. Umpire held that the reason for submitting false records of employment was a shortage of capital rather than a lack of employment. It was therefore found that false statements had indeed been made.

Decision 31417 Full Text of Decision 31417

Banking of hours by employer. Penalty of $5,340 imposed (1st time offender; 3 X B.Rate X 4 false statements). Employer alleged that Commission had no authority to adopt a minimum penalty. Held that Commission needs a policy for guidance for uniformity. Commission's discretion properly exercised.

Decision 27753 Full Text of Decision 27753

Operator of a business who falsely gave shortage of work as the reason an employee left her job. The Commission had exercised the discretion given it by ss. 33(2) and had imposed a penalty equal to 3 times the maximum weekly rate of benefit. The Umpire has no jurisdiction to reduce the penalty.

Decision 25872 Full Text of Decision 25872

Penalty of $2,556 upheld. Claimant had been laid off because she had requested the winter off due to babysitting difficulties. She was subsequently rehired while on UI 2 days a week; she worked 8 hours per week and was paid "under the table".

Decision 25504 Full Text of Decision 25504

This case rests on a single phone call during which the Insurance Officer did not identify herself as calling on behalf of the CEIC. To base a decision and impose a penalty on such basis, with no follow-up or no opportunity given to the employer to explain and respond to the charge, seems unreasonable.

Decision 25307 Full Text of Decision 25307

Held that the question of whether the employer knowingly made false statements by accepting, on claimant's request, to bunch up his hours of work in one-week blocks in order not to affect his UI benefits, was one of credibility and that it is the Board's function to assess the facts.

Decision 25198 Full Text of Decision 25198

Exhibits on file clearly indicate that the substitution of shortage of work instead of dismissal was done with the knowledge and consent of both parties at the request of the claimant and with the consent of the employer. Held that a penalty was correctly imposed on the employer under 33(2).

Decision 23454 Full Text of Decision 23454

Owner of restaurant who issued a Record of Employment to his wife even though she continued to work without interruption at the restaurant where her duties had not changed.