Decision T1777.18
Full Text of Decision T1777.18
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
The claimant challenged the decision of the Appeal Division which denied the leave to appeal of the SST - General Division decision confirming that she owes an EI overpayment of $4497 pursuant to section 43 and 47 of the EI Act. The General Division found that the money the claimant received constituted earnings under subsection 35(2) of the Employment Insurance Regulations, because the payment compensated her for her dismissal. The General Division found the claimant liable to repay any amount the Commission paid her as benefits to which she was not entitled under section 43 of the Employment Insurance Act. the Appeal Division refused the application for leave to appeal because the appeal had no reasonable chance of success. The application for judicial review was dismissed.
Decision A-0277.01
Full Text of Decision A-0277.01
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
The monies were paid as a result of a grievance and the grievance was in relation to the issue of severance pay. Held by umpire that the severance is directly related to work and earnings and as such it had to be considered as being earnings and allocated accordingly. Making reference to the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) decision in King (A-0486.95), the FCA summarily dismissed the application for judicial review.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
arising out of any employment |
|
Decision 51134
Full Text of Decision 51134
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under FCA A-0277.01
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
arising out of any employment |
|
Decision A-0207.99
Full Text of Decision A-0207.99
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Vacation pay paid upon lay-off and allocated from separation. Claimant alleged that previously she used to get her v.p. in the weeks preceeding her lay-off and that no allocation was done. The payroll however was relocated in the USA and employees were no longer paid v.p. unless they were actually taking time off. Claimant did not take vacation time. Umpire refused to interfere with the BOR findings and the FCA summarily dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
normal weekly earnings |
vac. pay |
Decision 44001
Full Text of Decision 44001
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under FCA A-0207.99
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
normal weekly earnings |
vac. pay |
Decision A-0051.97
Full Text of Decision A-0051.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Retroactive allocation of a separation incentive and severance pay resulting in an overpayment of $10,042. Amounts paid if the claimant had not yet returned to work a year after being laid off and remained on the recall list for two additional years. Citing Savarie (A-704-95), the CFA confirmed the application of 58(9), specifying that it was the lay-off that triggered the application of the collective agreement clause and gave rise to this conditional but already existing obligation to pay.
Decision A-0741.95
Full Text of Decision A-0741.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Commission decided that layoff pay was earnings and should be allocated effective the date of the layoff according to Reg. 57 and 58(9). Umpire upheld this decision since it was consistent with the Commission’s regulations. FCA dismissed the claimant’s appeal since there were no grounds for intervention.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
severance pay |
as income |
|
Decision A-0486.95
Full Text of Decision A-0486.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Temporary layoff on 2-01-91. Plant closure in 03-91. No monies paid except $5,000 received later under the Ontario Employee Wage Protection Program. Held that the payment was made by reason of the plant closure, not the layoff, so would be allocated from the plant closure. Commission's appeal dismissed on that issue but allowed on determination of earnings by the FCA.**NOTE: Based on the specifics of the case and on the definition of the word "termination" in the Ontario Employment Standards Act, Commission did not challenge the allocation for that particular case to the Supreme Court.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
provincial program |
|
| earnings |
income |
arising out of any employment |
|
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
| earnings |
relief grants |
|
|
Decision A-0500.95
Full Text of Decision A-0500.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Case similar to FCA in King (A-0486.95). Refer to summary indexed.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
arising out of any employment |
|
| earnings |
income |
provincial program |
|
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
| earnings |
relief grants |
|
|
Decision A-0560.94
Full Text of Decision A-0560.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Terminated 5-10-90 due to bankruptcy. Worked for trustees from 22-10-90 to 14-12-90. Sev. pay paid in 11-91 under the Ontario Wage Protection Program. Held that working for trustees was not for same employer and that sev. pay was to be allocated to weeks following bankruptcy. Upheld by the FCA.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
| interruption of earnings |
bankruptcy |
receivership |
|
| earnings |
allocation |
applicability |
|
Decision 25305
Full Text of Decision 25305
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0560.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
| interruption of earnings |
bankruptcy |
receivership |
|
| earnings |
allocation |
applicability |
|
Decision 26075A
Full Text of Decision 26075A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Vacation pay paid in anticipation of liquidation and closure of mine. Rehired immediately by the Receiver and worked 9 months. Held that he continued in effect for the same employer, that he suffered no separation until expiration of those 9 months and monies to be allocated from that separation.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
bankruptcy |
receivership |
|
Decision 29159
Full Text of Decision 29159
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Severance pay allocated, as per the labour agreement, after UI benefits have been exhausted. The Commission argues that this is a private contract and should not govern the UI Act which is a public act of Parliament and that ss. 58(9) applies as from the layoff date. Held that the Board erred in law.
Decision 29075
Full Text of Decision 29075
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Leave without pay from Air Canada granted on 7-12-92; begins work with new employmer on the same day where he works until 1-4-93; on that same day Air Canada advises him of his layoff and pays him severance pay. The said severance pay to be allocated as of 1-4-93, not 7-12-92.
Decision 28501
Full Text of Decision 28501
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Temporary layoff 2-1-91. Plant closure 3-91. No monies paid, except $5,000 received later under the Ontario Wage Protection Program. Held that the payment was made by reason of the plant closure, not the layoff, so would be allocated from date of plant closure, if not considered as relief grants.
Decision 28148
Full Text of Decision 28148
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Canadian General Electric: income extension benefits payable once the claimant has exhausted his UI benefits. Held that such monies are to be allocated retroactively, pursuant to ss. 58(10.1) of the Regulations, as from the week of layoff.
Decision 26324
Full Text of Decision 26324
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Lumberjack laid off permanently in 12-91. Received severance pay in 5-92. Claimed that he had a recall right until 6-92. Allocation to be made according to ss. 58(9) of the Regulations, as of 12-91, regardless of whether there was a collective agreement and he had a right of recall.
Decision 24991
Full Text of Decision 24991
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant laid off in 11-92. In accordance with the Ontario Employment Standards Act, he was paid wages in lieu of notice in 2-93, i.e. 13 weeks after layoff. Held that the monies were properly allocated from the 11-92 layoff rather than from 2-93.
Decision 24983
Full Text of Decision 24983
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 29-9-92. Under his contract, he could request half of his severance pay 6 weeks after and the last half 3 months after, i.e. 29-12-92. He requested all of it 8-4-93 and received it 27-5-93. Held that it was properly allocated starting in 12-92, this date being the triggering event.
Decision 24910
Full Text of Decision 24910
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Temporarily laid off in 2-92. Then the plant closed in 4-92. Nothing was payable until the employer determined that he had no alternative but to close. This triggered the "payable date". No indication in 2-92 that the plant was to close. Monies to be allocated from 4-92, not 2-92.
Decision 24614
Full Text of Decision 24614
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off indefinitely in 9-90. He accepted to sign off his recall notice in 12-91. This generated the payment of severance pay in 1-92. The date of the sign-off and the payment of severance to claimant is the date of termination. Monies to be allocated under ss. 58(9) starting 1-92.
Decision 24607
Full Text of Decision 24607
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant laid off in 2-92 retaining his recall rights. Following the 13-week period required by the Ontario Employment Standards Act, not having been recalled, he received pay in lieu of notice and vacation pay. Monies to be allocated from 2-92, not from 6-92. The Board clearly erred in law.
Decision 24470
Full Text of Decision 24470
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 5-2-91 with vacation pay allocated. Severance pay not allocated to him until 4-7-91 when he waived his recall rights having secured new employment. Claimant became eligible to severance pay upon layoff and regardless when he elects to receive it, it shall be allocated from week of layoff in 2-91.
Decision 24158
Full Text of Decision 24158
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Ceased for Algoma in 7-90 due to labour dispute. Found work elsewhere. He then severed his ties with Algoma in 8-91. Amounts paid, referable to a layoff, are to be allocated to the weeks following the layoff (8-91). No scope for allocating amounts paid to a period following a prior layoff (7-90).
Ceased for Algoma in 7-90 due to labour dispute. Found work elsewhere. He then severed his ties with Algoma in 8-91. Under ss. 58(9), the amount received in 8-91 was earnings paid. The amount paid in 12-91 was, prior to that date, earnings payable. Nothing turns on the 12-91 payment or date.
Decision 23977
Full Text of Decision 23977
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Improved severance pay allocated under separate agreement a few months after termination. It is argued for claimant that this was a transaction under para. 58(18)(b). While this was a transaction, (18) only applies where none of the other provisions of s. 58 apply. Retrospective allocation upheld.
Decision 23827
Full Text of Decision 23827
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 31-8-90. Not recalled 3-12-90 as planned, layoff extended to 1-3-91 and then employment was terminated. Under the Ontario Act, termination pay is payable when the layoff is for more than 13 weeks and was paid in 4-91. Monies correctly allocated from the date of layoff starting 2-9-90.
Decision 23806
Full Text of Decision 23806
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant submits that the amount he received in termination pay should be allocated as to when he received it, not when it was purported to be earned. This is clearly not the law as shown by ss. 58(9) and several decisions of Umpires in CUBs 14854, 18957, 17529, among others.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
Decision 23565
Full Text of Decision 23565
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 7-12-91. Recalled 13-3-92. Because the layoff exceeded 90 days, the employer was required to pay to claimant, and did pay her, 8 weeks wages in lieu of notice. CUB 14989 distinguished. Monies received after return to work correctly allocated under ss. 58(9) from 8-12-91.
Decision 22845
Full Text of Decision 22845
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
L'indemnité de départ doit s'ajouter à la paye de vacances et être répartie de façon consécutive à partir de la semaine du licenciement et non concurremment comme en a décidé le Conseil. Depuis les modifications apportées en 1989 au par. 58(9), l'affaire NICOLICH ne trouve plus application.
Decision 22730
Full Text of Decision 22730
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 3-10-89 one day before the strike. No evidence that he was ever recalled or subject to recall. Notice given by employer to Minister of Labour of intention to terminate operations 2-90. Termination monies paid to claimant in 4-90 correctly allocated by Board from 3-10-89, not from 2-90.
Decision 22547
Full Text of Decision 22547
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant received the monies on 30-3-91 (closure of the plant) whereas his last day of work was 26-7-91. The Board erred in fact in not determining that they were paid by reason of the anticipated closure of the plant, and in law in failing to allocate them from the date of separation under 58(9).
In order for earnings to be allocated pursuant to ss. 58(9) the event giving rise to the payment of the monies must first be identified. Was it a layoff or separation from the employment that resulted in the payment to the claimant of the monies?
Decision 20263
Full Text of Decision 20263
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0903.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| teaching |
earnings |
maternity leave |
|
Decision A-0903.91
Full Text of Decision A-0903.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Insurable bonus of $6,000 paid during maternity leave. The plan provided for $600 per month in 2 lump sums: 1 for September to December paid in September, the other for January to June paid in January. Not paid at time of, after or in contemplation of layoff under 58(9). To be allocated under 58(4).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| teaching |
earnings |
maternity leave |
|
Decision 22491
Full Text of Decision 22491
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Claimant was laid off 8-89. He received severance pay in 2-90. The Board referred to CUB 14989 to distinguish between the temporary layoff in 8-89 and permanent layoff in 2-90 and applied ss. 58(9) in relation to permanent layoff in 2-90. Held by the Umpire that a permanent layoff occurred in 8-89.
Decision 22437
Full Text of Decision 22437
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Clearly, ss. 58(9) requires allocation of earnings paid in contemplation of lay-off no matter when paid: CUB 21691. Here, the «triggering event» for the payment of termination pay and vacation pay was the anticipated plant closure. Monies to be allocated starting with the week of plant closure.
Laid off prior to 1-1-90, some recalled. Anticipated plant closure 2-2-90. The plant never did completely close, and some rehired. All received vacation and termination monies in 6-90. Irrelevant whether layoff was temporary and whether plant eventually closed. Monies to be allocated from 28-1-90.
Ss. 58(9) refers to a lay-off or separation. With respect to the claimants' argument that the employment relationship was not severed until they abandoned their recall rights, I agree that this may be so in the context of the Employment Standards Act, but not in an unemployment insurance context.
Decision 22179
Full Text of Decision 22179
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Last day worked 31-7-90. Ceased due to strike. End of strike 4-11-90. Lay-off notices also effective that date. It is argued that vacation pay should have been paid 7 days after 31-7 rather than in 11-90. There was sufficient evidence to hold that the lay-off or separation occurred on 4-11-90.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
from employer |
|
Decision 21952
Full Text of Decision 21952
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Severance pay paid in 4-90 correctly allocated retroactively from the date of layoff in 9-89.
Decision 21930
Full Text of Decision 21930
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Notice paid under new work standards legislation providing there is discontinuance of employer-employee relationship when the employee has not worked for more than six consecutive months for the employer. Sum correctly distributed as of dismissal date.
Decision 21773
Full Text of Decision 21773
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Construction worker receiving a day's wages in lieu of notice after completing a week's work; clauses 16.01 and 16.03 of decree examined. Decided that the in lieu of notice should be distributed pursuant to Reg. 58(9) over the next week.
Decision 21517
Full Text of Decision 21517
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
On layoff status since 6-89. Signed off his recall rights on 15-3-90 thereby terminating his employment. In accordance with the Ontario Employment Standards Act, severance pay was paid by cheque to him on 20-4-90. The week in which separation occurs here is that of 11-3-90.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
gross amount |
|
Decision 21512
Full Text of Decision 21512
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Quits work 3-5-90; does not know if he will be called back; his vacation pay is finally paid out 24-11-90. Correctly distributed pursuant to Reg. 58(9) as of 5-90.
Decision 21412
Full Text of Decision 21412
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
According to contract, dismissal compensation payable in 2 parts: one after 6 consecutive weeks of layoff, the other after 3 months. Correctly distributed based on dismissal pursuant to Reg. 58(9.1) even though insured was not unemployed when he received the second payment.
Decision 21384
Full Text of Decision 21384
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 17-1-91. Would normally have received severance pay on 19-4-91 (after 13 weeks). Resigned 28-2 so as to remove her name from the re-call list and get the money immediately. Monies properly allocated under reg. 58(10) from last day worked.
Decision 20979
Full Text of Decision 20979
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Six-week trainee in renovation; not remunerated; hired at the end of the training period, he was paid the commissions collected during the training period; says there was no work contract and that Reg. 58(9) applies. Decision is that this is not termination of employment but employment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
commissions |
|
|
Decision 19344
Full Text of Decision 19344
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0367.91
Decision A-0367.91
Full Text of Decision A-0367.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Elected to take receipt of severance pay on a week by week basis in an amount not exceeding 25% of UI rate and argues that ss.15(2) applies. Regulating power of 44(q) and GIROUX examined. Ss. 58(10.1) applies and monies properly allocated to full weeks. Upheld by FC.
Decision 19766
Full Text of Decision 19766
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
In the context of the Act, a suspension without pay is equivalent to a loss of employment or a separation from employment. As a result, monies received as settlement must be allocated from the week of separation (suspension without pay) rather than fromfinal termination. [p._9]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
layoff or separation |
definition |
|
| earnings |
awards |
allocation |
|
Decision 19238
Full Text of Decision 19238
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Dismissed 7-10-88 and files complaint; no salary granted as job found elsewhere for better salary. $2,000 amount paid conditional to total severance of employment relationship 7-2-90, breakdown to be allocated as of 7-2-90, not 7-10-88 under Reg. 58(9).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
awards |
allocation |
|
Decision 18275
Full Text of Decision 18275
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off 6-11-87. Severance pay payable and paid 9 months after. It was paid in respect of his final termination which occurred when the recall priority period terminated 8-8-88, 9 months after his lay-off. Correctly allocated as of 8-88.
Decision 18117
Full Text of Decision 18117
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
The company indicated that the settlement of $10,500 is directed to the 2 weeks following termination. Under reg. 58(10.1) any severance payment, regardless of the method applied either by the employer or employee, should be allocated equal to the weekly rate of normal earnings.
Decision 17805
Full Text of Decision 17805
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Severance pay to be paid over 15 months in 6 equal payments. Reg. 58(10.1) makes it clear that all severance pay regardless of how paid or allocated by employer, must be allocated on a weekly basis.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
bankruptcy |
|
|
Decision 17564
Full Text of Decision 17564
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
As a result of the plant closure, the employer negotiated an agreement with union whereby severance payments would be paid on 5 specific dates over a 15-month period. To be allocated week by week under reg. 58(10.1) regardless of how monies are paid.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
severance pay |
as income |
|
Decision 17529
Full Text of Decision 17529
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Operation closed, claimant terminated 27-3 and was paid all monies due. Rehired 30-3 until 30-10 to complete the plant closure. Termination monies to be allocated under reg. 58(10.1) and 58(13)(b) not from 30-10 but from 30-3, the date of separation giving rise to the payment.
Decision A-0716.88
Full Text of Decision A-0716.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Severance pay and vacation pay allocated from week of layoff 16-2 to 30-3. The Umpire was correct in allocating damages under 58(5)(b) from date of layoff rather than from 30-3. Ss. 58(5) does not prohibit allocation in excess of normal earnings. Regulations amended since.
Decision 15268
Full Text of Decision 15268
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0716.88
Decision 16336
Full Text of Decision 16336
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Laid off on 14-11-86 and receives benefits; receives vacation pay of $2208 6 months later; amount is spread in accordance with 58(10) starting on the date of termination of employment in 11-86.
Decision 15895
Full Text of Decision 15895
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Prior to 4-10-87, reg.58(9) permitted employers to allocate severance pay to a specific period. This possibility was terminated by enactment of reg. 58(10.1) which provides that severance pay, regardless of how paid or allocated by employer, must be allocated on a weekly basis.
Decision 13538
Full Text of Decision 13538
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0644.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
paid or payable |
|
Decision A-0644.87
Full Text of Decision A-0644.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
The Umpire did not err in finding that the termination allowance became payable when claimant left her employment on 29-5-85, rather than when she first elected to retire on 1-3-85. New agreement signed 21-3-85 effective same date.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
paid or payable |
|
Decision 14989
Full Text of Decision 14989
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Seasonal layoff 23-3-86; then claimant terminated while on layoff; severance and vacation pay issued 1-5-86 allocated from 23-3. Error of law and fact. Severance did not go back to initial layoff. It did not occur until 1-5. Allocation must run from 1-5.
Decision 14854
Full Text of Decision 14854
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
No doubt that the severance pay is earnings due to legislative changes in 3-85. Claimant on layoff since 12-85. Decision to close plant taken in 2-86 and severance pay then paid. Paid in respect of separation which occurred 28-2-86 and to be allocated from that date, not 12-85.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
severance pay |
as income |
|
Decision A-1235.84
Full Text of Decision A-1235.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
from week of layoff |
|
Summary:
Notice payable under Labour Standards Act if lay-off is for at least 6 months. Insured laid off for an indefinite period, which ended up lasting longer than 6 months. Held that the compensation paid after 6 months was payable at time of lay-off. Leave denied by SC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
paid or payable |
|
