Summary of Issue: Charter

Decision A-0411.96 Full Text of Decision A-0411.96

The claimant, a teacher on an unpaid leave of absence, disentitled for the Christmas and Spring break periods while she was attending a course of study approved by the Commission. Umpire allowed claimant's appeal stating that Reg. 46.1(2) had no application. The FCA stated that the claimant's claim for benefits was based on attendance at a training program to which she has been referred by the Commission. However, Reg. 46.1(2)a), as the more specific provision of the legislation, takes precedence over the more general provision.

Decision A-0368.95 Full Text of Decision A-0368.95

Teacher paid maternity and subsequently sickness benefits which were suspended at the end of June, beginning of the non-teaching period. Claimant disentitled under Reg. 46.1 and decision upheld by the Umpire who determined that Reg. 46.1 did not violate claimant's right to equality guaranteed by S.15 of the Charter. FCA in substantial agreement with the reasons of the Umpire and ruled that the FCA decision rendered in E.Taylor (A-681-90) was directly applicable to the case.

Decision A-0080.95 Full Text of Decision A-0080.95

The purpose of section 46.1 of the Regulations is to prevent teachers who receive wages spread over a period of twelve months but who do not provide services every day, from receiving money from two different sources that have the same objective.

Decision 23938A Full Text of Decision 23938A

Held that a teacher who is collecting sickness benefits, following maternity benefits, is not entitled to continue to collect such benefits during the nonteaching period, and that s. 46.1 does not violate s. 15 of the Charter under the circumstances.

Decision 19672A Full Text of Decision 19672A

It is submitted that reg. 46.1 conflicts with the enabling para. 44(h) of the Act and is therefore ultra vires and invalid. It appears clear that reg. 46.1 does precisely what is contemplated, authorized and enabled to be done by 44(h). No reason why itwould be ultra vires. It is also submitted that reg. 46.1 has a disproportionate adverse impact upon women teachers who take maternity leave and thus has the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex contrary to ss.15(1) of the Charter. CUB 18796 quoted and argument dismissed for the same reasons.

Decision A-0681.90 Full Text of Decision A-0681.90

It is argued that para. 46.1(2)(a) treats ill and disabled teachers differently than ill or disabled employees are treated by the Act. The distinction relates to employment rather than to a personal characteristic of the claimant. Not the kind of discrimination envisaged by the Charter.

Decision 14246A Full Text of Decision 14246A

Refer to: A-0681.90

Decision 19672 Full Text of Decision 19672

Claimant argued that reg. 46.1(2)(a) was ultra vires because it was contrary to the purpose and intent of the Act and not within the scope of enabling para. 44(h). Also that it was unconstitutional being contrary to 15(1) of the Charter. Both arguments dismissed.

Decision 18796 Full Text of Decision 18796

Teacher on maternity leave from 12-87. Maternity UI paid. The school board did not rehire her until 9-88. She collected regular UI from 1-5 to 30-6-88 while employed as substitute. Properly disentitled from 1-7-88. Contract not terminated. No discrimination based on pregnancy.

Decision 17066 Full Text of Decision 17066

Counsel for claimant is not contesting reg. 46.1 with respect to teachers in general, but with respect to his client, a teacher under suspension. It is clear that para._44(h) provides the Commission with the authority to make regulations relating to teachers. See CUB 12772.

Decision 14880 Full Text of Decision 14880

Claimant says that reg. 46.1 is unfair. That does not relieve the Commission, Board or Umpire from the obligation to apply it. Not particularly unfair if compared to other forms of employment. No one is entitled to UI for periods of paid vacation. UI isfor loss of earnings.

Decision 13176 Full Text of Decision 13176

Whether reg. 46.1 infringes the Charter. I do not find that argument convincing. In order to have discrimination, or an unequal application of the law, the distinction made between individuals must be one without rational basis.

Decision 12772 Full Text of Decision 12772

Because teachers' contracts provide for an annual salary but a 10-month work period, special treatment is provided in reg. 46.1 [p. 10]. There is no basis for a determination that this provision is constitutionally or procedurally unsound [p. 11].

Decision A-1240.84 Full Text of Decision A-1240.84

It was argued that reg. 46.1(1) failed to accord to teachers equality before the law and the protection of the law, in contravention of the Bill of Rights. There are absolutely no facts disclosed which would support such contention.