Decision 18243
Full Text of Decision 18243
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
existence of refusal |
|
|
Summary:
The first question is whether in fact there was a refusal. The claimant submits she did not actually refuse work but rather told the employer to look for someone better qualified and get back to her if unsuccessful. A reasonably prudent person would have accepted the offer.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
good cause |
|
|
| availability for work |
job search |
as a requirement |
|
Decision 16324
Full Text of Decision 16324
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
existence of refusal |
|
|
Summary:
Because of certain requirements dictated by the employee's professional ethics, the employer withdrew the offer he had made. This is equivalent to refusing employment.
Decision 14801
Full Text of Decision 14801
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
existence of refusal |
|
|
Summary:
Claimant states she never refused as she was never given a referral notice. I would note that disqualification was not imposed for refusing after having been given referral notice, but for being aware of a job opportunity as envisaged in 40(1)(b).
Decision 14215
Full Text of Decision 14215
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
existence of refusal |
|
|
Summary:
The Board believes that the interview was confrontational which might explain the contradictions, and claimant did not bother to ask particulars or expressed refusal before being given particulars. No grounds on which an Umpire could interfere. [p. 6]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| teaching |
availability for work |
summer months |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
not binding for future |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
effective date |
|
