Labour Disputes

Questions to Answer
Are disentitlement conditions present? Is there a labour dispute? Is there a stoppage of work? Is the stoppage attributable to the labour dispute? Is the stoppage at claimant's place of employment? Did claimant lose/fail to resume employment because of the stoppage at his/her place of employment? Can claimant obtain relief from disentitlement? Can disentitlement be suspended? Can disentitlement be terminated?
References
Act: subsection 2(1), section 36; related subsection 49(1) Regulations: sections 52, 53
Legal test
Disentitlement: subsection 36(1) of the Act Claimant loses an employment or fails to resume an employment because of: A stoppage of work Attributable to a labour dispute At the premises where the claimant was employed Non-Application subsection 36(4): relief from disentitlement Claimant proves: not participating, financing or directly interested in the dispute that caused the stoppage of work Disentitlement for Part-Week: subsection 36(2) Regulations section 52 Claimant loses or fails to resume part-time work Disentitlement Suspended: subsection 36(3) Claimant establishes: Otherwise entitled to special benefits or section 25 benefits, and Prior to the stoppage, had begun making arrangements for leave? Disentitlement Terminated: subsection 36(1) Regulations section 53 Stoppage of work has terminated, or Claimant becomes regularly engaged elsewhere in insurable employment
Onus of proof
Commission must prove: Loss of employment Resulting from stoppage Attributable to labour dispute At premises where claimant was employed TOUZEL A-1063-92 Claimant must prove: that relief conditions are met and that no disentitling conditions apply subsections 36(4), 49(1) FALARDEAU A-396-85
Key Case Law
STILLO A-651-01, TOUZEL A-1063-92: Meaning of the term "labour dispute". Onus of proof FALARDEAU A-396-85: See Onus of proof. ZWARICH A-521-86, MEREDITH A-226-88: Labour Dispute Legislation and Charter of Rights DICAIRE A-834-96, RASMUSSEN A-647-95: Validity of Regulations subsection 53(1) STRICK A-556-91, RASMUSSEN A-647-95: "Work Stoppage". Production levels maintained by employer. DEBIEN A-814-91, BERNIER A-324-87: Work stoppage vs labour dispute COURNOYER A-150-00, WHITE A-1036-92, GAMBOA A-1037-92, HARDING A-1039-92: Purpose of labour dispute legislation Loss of employment. (Laid-off in anticipation of strike 3 days later) DUGAL A-593-00: Unable to resume employment - employees on lay-off. SIMARD A-1415-84: Loss of part-time employment WELLICOME A-690-96: Loss of employment. Casual worker - pattern of employment. DONTIGNY A-186-03 upholding CUB 56057: Loss of employment due to pressure tactics - refusal to work overtime. BOUILLON A-351-95, BOURCIER A-352-95: Loss of employment - trainees on the job. GADOURY A-209-04, (leave to appeal dismissed by Supreme Court [30815]), IMBEAULT A-181-83, HURREN A-942-85, HINDS A-139-88, COLE A-741-87: Duration of disentitlement. "Relief provisions" subsection 36(4) vs "termination provisions" subsection 36(1) SIMONEAU A-611-96, DALLAIRE A-825-95: Causal link between labour dispute and stoppage of work ABRAHAMS A-872-80, McKENZIE A-1460-92: "Regularly engaged". Establishment of continuity of employment. HILLS Supreme Court [19094]: "Financing" Mandatory payment vs voluntary contribution BATTISTA A-375-03, BLACK A-552-00, LEGARE A-512-97: Relieving provisions of subsection 36(4) OAKES-PEPIN A-38-96: Termination of the stoppage of work. Considers history and validity of EI Regulations subsection 53(1) [former UI Regulations subsection 49(1)] THOMAS, JABOUR, DRUDI et al A-39-98, KUMP et al A-41-98: Considers whether there was a loss of employment resulting from a stoppage of work attributable to a labour dispute; considers whether employer's continuing activities were due to "extraordinary measures"