CUB 61508

KRINDLE, U

The commission appeals a decision of the board of referees that the claimant had established just cause for voluntarily terminating her employment.

The claimant worked in the bakery at Superstore for many years. She was furthering her education at night and was able to do so because of an understanding supervisor. When her supervisor changed, her situation changed dramatically. The claimant's schedules were constantly changed on her without notice.

The claimant was accepted as a student at Assiniboine Community College. The claimant had not, according to the evidence before the Board of Referees, at the time she applied to the college, intended to return to school on a full-time basis for a few years. However, the situation with her new supervisor caused her to consider going to school part-time at the Community College as she had at night school. She spoke to her new supervisor about the possibility of her working part-time, rather than full-time. Her new supervisor told her that she could not reduce her hours to part-time. The supervisor said that the claimant had to quit her employment and re-apply to come on as a part-time employee at the same salary. The information her supervisor had given her was incorrect. As a part-time employee, her wages were cut to $7.00 per hour from the $14.00 she had been making as a full-time employee. The effect of the misinformation from her supervisor was that, rather than the claimant's working half time for half the pay, the claimant would now be working half-time and being paid one-quarter of what she had previously been paid. The claimant anticipated being able to manage without assistance from employment insurance benefits, according to the reasons of the Board, on a half-time, half-pay basis. The union was not able to help the claimant because she quit voluntarily, even though she had done so as a result of misinformation from her supervisor. The policy of the employer prevented her from reapplying for full-time within one year. With those limited options the claimant decided to go to school full time and look for part time work elsewhere.

The commission states that the claimant voluntarily terminated her employment to return to school and relies on exhibit 9 for that contention. I disagree. Exhibit 9 makes it clear that the claimant ultimately intended to go to A.C.C. on a full-time basis, but that plan was not imminent. Exhibit 9 also makes it clear that the claimant quit her job in order to be able to work for the same employer in a different capacity which would, according to the representations of the employer, result in her earning sufficient funds that she could survive without having to rely on employment insurance benefits. What caused the claimant ultimately to truly terminate her employment with Superstore was that the salary which she was being paid was one-half the salary which she had been told by her supervisor that she would be paid.

I am not satisfied that the Board of Referees erred in fact or law in deciding as it did. The appeal of the Commission is dismissed.

Ruth Krindle

UMPIRE

OTTAWA, Ontario
August 24, 2004