| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
compensatory leave |
|
|
Summary:
Reg. 37(3) is a modification of the general rule, the interruption of earnings will occur at a different time. When read in its context, it does not merely refer to the obvious (employee on leave) but rather to one who has a layoff when entitled to a period off work. [p. 6]
The only possible meaning of that clause in the labour agreement, "all such leave shall be completed before 1-12" is that which the Umpire gave it [p. 7], i.e. days of leave not taken by that date are lost and do not postpone the interruption of earnings [p. 13 in CUB].
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
charter |
|
|
Summary:
Ss. 37(3) was made pursuant to para. 44(r). It cannot be said to arbitrarily change the rules established by the Act. It is not ultra vires and does not contravene s. 15 of the Charter.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Summary:
A determination of the date at which earnings were interrupted depends, under ss. 37(3), on the length of the leave to which he was entitled. A determination as to his rights under the labour agreement was not a question of fact but one of law. The Board erred in law.
