Summary of Issue: Neglect To Avail

Decision 28027 Full Text of Decision 28027

As per the Commission, there is no requirement in 27(1)(b) that an offer of employment be made, and the Board erred in law by holding that claimant was never given a concrete offer. Held that the absence of a concrete offer was in fact irrelevant, but this was not central to the Board's decision.

Decision 22665 Full Text of Decision 22665

Claimant had agreed with employer to delay his recall; no refusal as such. It is well established in the case law that disqualification based on para. 27(1)(b) does not require proof of an offer of employment. His negligence in regard to his right of seniority clearly meets the requirement of 27(1)(b).

Decision 18749 Full Text of Decision 18749

The Board's decision alludes to a requirement that an actual offer of work be extended to claimant. Para. 27(1)(b) not to be confused with 27(1)(a). A job offer need not be made under 27(1)(b), so long as an "opportunity" of suitable employment is available to claimant.