IN THE MATTER of the EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
- and -
IN THE MATTER of a claim for benefits by MARTHA BURT
- and -
IN THE MATTER of an appeal to an Umpire by the claimant from
a decision of a Board of Referees given at Gander, Newfoundland
on July 21, 1999.
THE HONOURABLE R.E. SALHANY Q.C., UMPIRE:
This appeal was heard at Gander, Newfoundland, on Monday, April 3, 2000.
At issue is whether the appellant voluntarily left her employment without just cause. The evidence before the Board revealed that the appellant was working at Extendicare (Canada) Ltd. In Alberta as a Personal Care Aide when she was advised that her father had been hospitalized. She spoke to her mother who told her that she was unable to look after her father. On November 15, 1998, she gave her employer two weeks notice and returned home to look after her father. After looking after her father, she applied for and obtained new employment on February 15, 1999 but was laid off six weeks later.
The Board of Referees, in an unfortunately very short decision on the critical issue in this case, concluded that, since the appellant had not requested a leave of absence from her employer, she had left her employment without just cause. What they had to consider, and failed to consider, was whether the appellant fell within the exception contained in section 29(c)(v), namely, whether she had no alternative to leaving because she had an "obligation to care for ..a member of the immediate family." There is no obligation upon a claimant who has an obligation to care for a family member to first seek a leave of absence from an employer.
There is ample evidence to support the appellant's contention that she left her employ to care for her father. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the decision of the Board of Referees is set aside and in its place will be substituted a finding that the appellant had just cause for leaving her employment with Extendicare.
R.E. SALHANY
UMPIRE
DATED at Gander, Newfoundland this 3rd day of April, 2000.
2011-01-10