| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Summary:
Quit her job after refusing two alternatives as neither allowed her to work full time during the day. Umpire found that just cause was implicitly considered by the BOR when it found that the employer had in good faith made reasonable offers of job to the claimant. FCA disagreed with the Umpire's conclusion finding that the BOR did not fully consider whether the claimant had just cause for leaving her employment. By focusing almost exclusively on the issue of whether the employer's re-organization of its business was done in good faith, the BOR failed to have proper regard for the statutory test for just cause as it found in subsection 28(4) of the Act.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
questions to examine |
|
Summary:
Quit her job after refusing two alternatives as neither allowed her to work full time during the day. Umpire found that just cause was implicitly considered by the BOR when it found that the employer had in good faith made reasonable offers of job to the claimant. FCA disagreed with the Umpire's conclusion finding that the BOR did not fully consider whether the claimant had just cause for leaving her employment. By focusing almost exclusively on the issue of whether the employer's re-organization of its business was done in good faith, the BOR failed to have proper regard for the statutory test for just cause as it found in subsection 28(4) of the Act.
