I. The Legislation

The legislation bestows upon the Commission the power to make regulations with respect to teachers.

Paragraph 54(j)  Employment Insurance Act

Teaching is defined as the occupation of teaching in a pre-elementary, an elementary or a secondary school, including a technical or vocational school.

Subsection 33(1)  Employment Insurance Regulations

A claimant who was employed in teaching for any part of his or her qualifying period is not entitled to receive benefits for any week of unemployment that falls in any non-teaching period unless:

1. the claimant’s contract of employment for teaching has terminated;
2. the claimant’s employment in teaching was on a casual or substitute basis; or
3. the claimant qualifies to receive benefits in respect of employment in an occupation other than teaching.

Subsection 33(2)  Employment Insurance Regulations

A non-teaching period is defined as that period which occurs annually at regular or irregular intervals during which no work is performed by a significant number of people employed in teaching.

Subsection 33(1)  Employment Insurance Regulations

These general rules do not apply where the claimant is entitled to maternity, parental or adoption benefits.

Subsection 33(2)  Employment Insurance Regulations

Where a claimant qualifies to receive benefits in respect of employment in an occupation other than teaching, the amount of benefits payable for a week of unemployment that falls within any non-teaching period is limited to the amount that is payable in respect of the employment in that other occupation.

Subsection 33(3)  Employment Insurance Regulations

II. Principles of Law

a. Purpose of the Legislation

The reason that teachers receive special treatment under the legislation is because they work for ten months of the year but have contracts of service which continue throughout twelve months. Therefore, there is no lay-off or separation from employment giving rise to an interruption of earnings. The purpose of the Regulations governing teachers is to prevent “double dipping”. Teachers are not entitled to collect employment insurance benefits during the non-teaching period when earnings are payable to them for that same period pursuant to their teaching contract.

Petts v. Canada (Unemployment Insurance Umpire), [1974] 2 F.C. 225 (F.C.A.) A-166-74
Moyer v. M.E.I. (1981), 41 N.R. 244 (F.C.A.) A-97-81
Canada (A.G.) v. Partridge, A-704-97, June 4, 1999 (F.C.A.)
Canada (A.G.) v. Donachey, A-411-96, May 8, 1997 (F.C.A.)
Canada (A.G.) v. St-Coeur (1996), 199 N.R. 45 (F.C.A.) A-80-95
Canada (A.G.) v. Lewis, A-475-89, June 19, 1990 (F.C.A.); affirming CUB 17053

b. Meaning of Term “Non-Teaching Period”

The term “non-teaching period” does not only refer to the summer vacation months of July and August but also includes the Christmas and spring breaks or any other period of time off work.

Canada (A.G.) v. St-Coeur (1996), 199 N.R. 45 (F.C.A.) A-80-95
Dupuis-Johnson v. C.E.I.C. (1996), 201 N.R. 226 (F.C.A.) A-511-95

c. Termination of Teaching Contract

For claimants who are teachers, the issue is whether there was a period of unemployment between the end of his or her employment for one school year and the beginning of his or her re-employment for the following school year. This is a mixed question of fact and law.

Gauthier v. C.E.I.C., A-128-95, October 6, 1995 (F.C.A.)

A teaching contract does not terminate at the end of the school year if the claimant received hold back pay for the summer vacation months. To allow otherwise would permit a claimant to be doubly compensated for that period of time.

Canada (A.G.) v. Partridge, [1999] F.C.J. No. 974 (F.C.A.) A-704-97
Bishop v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission), [2002] F.C.J. No. 964 (F.C.A.) A-151-01

The jurisprudence and the legislative intention behind section 33 of the Employment Insurance Regulations are based on the clear premise that, unless there is a veritable break in the continuity of a teacher’s employment, the teacher will not be entitled to benefits for the non-teaching period. In cases where teachers’ contracts terminate at the end of June and they are re-hired for the following school year, they are not entitled to employment insurance benefits for the months of July and August.

Oliver v. Canada (A.G.), [2003] F.C.J. No. 316 (F.C.A.) A-811-00
Bishop v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission), [2002] F.C.J. No. 964 (F.C.A.) A-151-01
Canada (A.G.) v. Partridge, [1999] F.C.J. No. 974 (F.C.A.) A-704-97
Canada (A.G.) v. Hann, [1997] F.C.J. No. 1641 (F.C.A.)
Gauthier v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission), [1995] F.C.J. No. 1350 (F.C.A.) A-128-95

d. Teaching on a Casual or Substitute Basis

Claimants who are engaged in casual or substitute teaching during their qualifying period are entitled to receive benefits during the annual non-teaching periods.

Canada (A.G.) v. Lewis, A-475-89, June 19, 1990 (F.C.A.) affirming CUB 17053

e. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

The special rules with respect to teachers do not violate the equality provisions found in section 15 of the Charter.

Hempel v. Canada (A.G.), A-368-95, May 15, 1996 (F.C.A.)
Canada (A.G.) v. Taylor (1991), 81 D.L.R. (4th) 679 (F.C.A.) A-681-90

III. Related Topics

• Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• Eligibility for Benefits
• Parental Benefits
• Qualifying Period