Summary Search Results...


Decision 55320 Full Text of Decision 55320

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

The BOR erred in only taking into consideration the position the claimant was working in at the time of the work stoppage, i.e. in a non-bargaining unit. It could not ignore the facts that he was a due-paying member of the bargaining unit, that he was therefore participating in as well as financing the labour dispute through his dues and, most importantly, the fact that he was directly interested in the outcome and did in fact ripe some benefits, including some benefits on retirement.

Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute directly interested in the future
labour dispute financing

Decision 55299 Full Text of Decision 55299

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0375.03


Decision A-0375.03 Full Text of Decision A-0375.03

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

The issue simply put is whether receiving support payment can be equated to participating in the strike. The Court confirms the Board's decision and held by Umpire that the claimant, in accepting benefits from the union, failed to establish that he did not participate in the labour dispute.


Decision 39832A Full Text of Decision 39832A

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

Claimant's stated he was aware that the strike started 26 Feb. and he chose to return to work the next day. Claimant's representative said that he was too ill to participate in picketing and consequently was not participating in or directly interested in the labour dispute. Umpire found that the Commission is correct in not providing benefits to someone who is still employed by an employer who is therefore ineligible to receive benefits. The fact that he is still a member in good standing with the union also indicates that he was a beneficiary of whatever positive result the union obtained from the strike.

Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation by union

Decision A-0800.87 Full Text of Decision A-0800.87

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

A member of claimant's union, while drunk, entered the plant by way of a fire escape and attacked claimant who was working. Reason unknown and that member was fired. That mere incident is irrelevant in deciding whether members of claimant's grade or class participated.

Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute stoppage of work premises

Decision 11295A Full Text of Decision 11295A

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

Refer to: A-0800.87

Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute stoppage of work premises

Decision 12102 Full Text of Decision 12102

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute participation definition
Summary:

Alleged that demonstration not intended to support strike picket. Nonetheless participation in demonstration created impression of support for strikers' cause, if only indirectly. Act does not refer to direct participation. [p. 16]

Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
labour dispute conditions required for disentitlement
labour dispute rationale
labour dispute stoppage of work premises
labour dispute loss of employment prior to stoppage
labour dispute directly interested own conditions at issue
labour dispute directly interested recall after stoppage
Date modified: