Summary of Issue: Separation From Work

Decision A130.18 Full Text of Decision A130.18

The claimant applied for sickness benefits in September 2015, he was told by the Commission that the pension income he was receiving from his union would have to be deducted from his benefits. The General Division of the Social Security Tribunal had concluded that the applicant’s pension from his trade union constituted earnings to be deducted from his sickness benefits, and the Appeal Division found no error in that decision. The application for judicial review should therefore be dismissed. The application for judicial review was dismissed. La demande de contrôle judiciaire a été rejetée.

Decision 77008 Full Text of Decision 77008

An initial claim for employment insurance benefits was established. The Commission allocated the vacation, severance and wages in lieu of notice. The Board of Referees reviewed the legislation and jurisprudence governing allocations and correctly concluded that the Commission’s calculations were correct. As the Board stated, the problem arises because claimants are not properly informed when they are temporarily laid off that if the lay-off becomes permanent, any severance or vacation payments then made will be allocated back and an overpayment will result. The appeal by the claimant is dismissed by the Umpire.

Decision A0397.08 Full Text of Decision A0397.08

The claimants were discharged from their employment due to the bankruptcy of their employer and received several payments such as vacation pay. This decision deals with the application of ss. 36(9) to 36(19) of the EIR with respect to the allocation of earnings. Based on Lemay v. Canada (2005 FCA 433), the FCA reiterated that s. 36(9) of the EIR covers any part of the earnings that becomes due and payable at the time of termination of the contract of employment and the commencement of unemployment. The FCA went on to conclude that s. 36(19) is inapplicable because it can only be used when ss. 36(1) to 36(18) are not applicable. Lastly, the FCA noted that s. 36(9) of the EIR puts emphasis on the motive of the payment rather than its timing.

Decision 41594 Full Text of Decision 41594

Two months after his lay-off, clmt received severance pay after learning that the plant was closing. Umpire ruled that the severance pay should be allocated as of the date of the official plant closure as it is the date of the event that gave rise to the severance payment.