IN THE MATTER of the EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
- and -
IN THE MATTER of a claim by
NORA HEANS
- and -
IN THE MATTER of an appeal to an Umpire by the Employer ALL ISLAND DEER (2002) LTD. from a decision by the Board of Referees given on March 15, 2005 at Nanaimo, British Columbia.
DECISION
The Honourable R.J. Marin
[1] This Employer appeal was to have been heard in Nanaimo on March 21, 2006. The Employer did not appear to pursue this appeal, and the Commission declared not to have any interest in the outcome of the appeal. I therefore proceeded to render a decision on the record.
[2] The claimant was employed as parts manager with All Island Deer Ltd. when she left her employment. The Commission ruled it was not a justified departure from employment and excluded her from benefits.
[3] The circumstances of this matter were found by the Board to have had a serious effect on the claimant's health, and in its decision at Exhibit 14.7 states as follows:
The Board asked Ms. Heans if it was possible for her to seek other employment prior to quitting. She replied that she was burnt out at the time, and had stopped seeking other employment because she was stressed out. It would also have been very difficult for her to find employment in the same field because of the seasonal slowdown, but thought that another field of work would have been possible, if she had been able to work.
[4] It concluded in its findings of fact at Exhibit 14.8:
The Commission has also argued that Ms. Heans has failed to demonstrate that her work place situation was not so intolerable that she had not [sic] choice but to quit without other employment to do [sic] to. The Board finds the Commission has failed to consider the evidence which shows that the financial viability of the company would be a reasonable source of concern of Ms. Heans, since her job could potentially be in jeopardy, should the company go into bankruptcy. Since there were three separate incidents during her last year of employment when the company was placed on COD status with John Deer, the Board finds this is sufficient evidence to support that there was little job security for Ms. Heans which would be a source of stress.
[5] The Board concluded the claimant was justified in leaving employment because of the intolerable circumstances. Its final paragraph at Exhibit 14-10 sets out the rationale of the Board for its decision:
The Board is satisfied that Ms. Heans has demonstrated that her work place was to intolerable as to require her immediate departure from her employment, and thereby, has demonstrated that she had just cause. In accordance with Section 30(1) of the Employment Insurance Act, the indefinite disqualification must be removed.
[6] In the circumstances, it has not been shown the Board erred in fact or in law. I accordingly dismiss the Employer appeal.
R.J. MARIN
UMPIRE
OTTAWA, Ontario
April 10, 2006