In the Matter of the Employment Insurance Act,
S.C. 1996, c. 23
and
In the Matter of a claim for unemployment benefits by
Daniel Barter
and
In the Matter of an Appeal by the Commission from the decision of a Board of Referees given at Sydney, Nova Scotia on October 31, 2002
Appeal heard at Sydney, Nova Scotia on September 17, 2003
DECISION
R. C. STEVENSON, UMPIRE:
The Commission appeals from the decision of a Board of Referees allowing Mr. Barter's appeal from rulings of the Commission (1) that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because he had voluntarily left an employment without just cause and (2) that he was disentitled from receiving unemployment benefits because he had not proved he was available for work. Mr. Barter did not attend the hearing of the present appeal.
Mr. Barter had become unemployed in December 2001. He applied for benefits and a benefit period was established. In May of 2002 he was accepted for a course at the University College of Cape Breton commencing in September. He found summer employment in Ontario from June 10 to August 30 when he left to return to Cape Breton to enrol at the College.
With respect to the first issue, the Board of Referees found Mr. Barter had just cause to leave his job "because this is why he went to Ontario for summer work to obtain monies to enable him to go to college which he applied for in May."
While I have considerable sympathy for claimants who live in areas of high unemployment and take courses to improve their employment qualifications, it has been consistently held by umpires and by the Federal Court of Appeal that leaving an employment to return to school is not just cause within the meaning of the Employment Insurance Act. The Board of Referees therefore erred in law and in fact in finding that Mr. Barter had just cause.
On the second issue the Board of Referees noted that Mr. Barter pointed out that he was available for work because his program director had indicated he would be able to arrange his course schedule to fit any employment he might obtain. The Board also noted that Mr. Barter had a history, from age 13, of working while attending school.
On the issue of availability, I cannot find that the Board of Referees erred in law or in principle or that it based its decision on any erroneous finding of fact.
The Commission's appeal is allowed with respect to the issue of voluntarily leaving employment without just cause and the decision of the Board of Referees on that issue is rescinded.
The Commission's appeal is dismissed with respect to the issue of availability.
RONALD C. STEVENSON
Umpire
FREDERICTON, NEW BRUNSWICK
September 26, 2003