Summary of Issue: Good Cause

Decision A-0928.96 Full Text of Decision A-0928.96

Working on call, claimant refused employment on four occasions. Two seven-week disqualifications imposed. Thought that if she accepted a one-day replacement offer, she could lose a long-term replacement position if such an opening should arise. Even though she was informed to the contrary by the employer, claimant continued to refuse one-day replacements. Umpire determined that the employment was suitable and that the claimant was subject to disqualification for each refusal of work without just cause. Claimant's appeal summarily dismissed by the FCA.

Decision 23944 Full Text of Decision 23944

Refer to: A-0085.94

Decision A-0085.94 Full Text of Decision A-0085.94

Even if the Umpire had applied the correct paragraph - 27(2)(b) - he could not rely on it, as he did rely on 27(2)(c), to establish that the claimant had good cause for not accepting employment. All the provisions of ss. 27(2) relate to what is suitable employment, not to what is good cause.

Decision 24913 Full Text of Decision 24913

The jurisprudence shows that "good cause" means, when given all the circumstances, that claimant acts in a manner in which a reasonable person would normally be expected to act in the circumstances.

Decision 22477 Full Text of Decision 22477

In CUB 18653, I held it was an error in law for a Board to refer to "just cause" in considering a disqualification under s. 27. The test for "good cause" has been well established by the case law as being what a reasonable and prudent person would have done in similar circumstances. In light of new ss. 28(4) and of my understanding that "just cause" in s. 28 reflects a more stringent standard than "good cause" in s. 27, the obligation of claimant to care for her children ought to have been considered in assessing whether she had good cause for declining to return to previous job.

Decision 18413 Full Text of Decision 18413

The test of good cause, now settled by the jurisprudence, is whether the claimant acted in a manner which a reasonable person would normally be expected to follow in similar circumstances.

Decision 18243 Full Text of Decision 18243

Good cause is established if the claimant shows she acted prudently in a manner which a reasonable person in similar circumstances would follow.

Decision 18131 Full Text of Decision 18131

To establish good cause a claimant must demonstrate that a reasonably prudent person would have thought it justifiable to refuse paid employment even though he had no other job to go to.

Decision 16748 Full Text of Decision 16748

The test of good cause, now well settled by UI cases (e.g. CUBs 14676, 12232), is whether the claimant acted in a manner which a reasonable person would normally be expected to follow in similar circumstances.

Decision 16136 Full Text of Decision 16136

A question of fact to be determined objectively on the facts of the particular case and the criterion is more than simply a matter of preference or even individual financial circumstance. Good cause exists if claimant acted prudently and in a manner normally expected of a person.

Decision 14676 Full Text of Decision 14676

Burden to show good cause considerably lightened if shown on balance of probability that employment was unsuitable. Test laid down in CUB 6990: claimant is expected to act prudently in a manner which a person will normally be expected to follow in like circumstances. [p. 7]

Decision 13996 Full Text of Decision 13996

The issue is not whether the claimant acted in good faith. Good cause is established when he acted prudently and as a reasonable man.

Decision 13728 Full Text of Decision 13728

The Board found that the claimant had just cause for refusing the position and reduced the suspension to 3 weeks. The Board erred in law. Having found that the claimant had just cause, it has no jurisdiction to impose any disqualification period.

Decision 12951 Full Text of Decision 12951

A claimant always has the right to turn down employment because of personal considerations. The assessment of suitability of employment however must be based on objective factors and not on the basis of personal preference.

Decision 12244 Full Text of Decision 12244

Valid reason is deemed to be established if, in all the circumstances, claimant acted with prudence required of person in such situation.

Decision 12232 Full Text of Decision 12232

Good cause is considered to be established if, under all the circumstances, a claimant acts prudently in a manner in which a person would normally be expected to follow in like circumstances. Good cause is considered to be established if, under all the circumstances, a claimant acts prudently in a manner in which a person would normally be expected to follow in like circumstances. [p._4]

Decision 09629 Full Text of Decision 09629

The Board erred in law in neglecting the plain meaning of "good cause" and substituting instead a qualified meaning developed by jurisprudence which seemingly equates good cause with whether one acted prudently, this being contrary to intentions of Parliament as expressed.

Decision A-0800.80 Full Text of Decision A-0800.80

The Umpire erred in deciding that the issue was whether claimant acted in good faith. Ss.40(1) uses the words "good cause". A claimant can act in good faith but still not have good cause for his or her action. Case referred back to Umpire.