Careers

EI (Employment Insurance) discussion thread

  • Last Updated:
  • May 25th, 2018 12:51 am
Deal Addict
Sep 22, 2013
1684 posts
579 upvotes
turtler wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 2:01 pm
What is considered an acceptable reason to quit? What is considered an unacceptable reason to quit?
The reasons listed below could be considered just cause for leaving your job voluntarily:

quitting to start a new job
accompanying your spouse or dependent child to live in another city
your employer asks you to engage in illegal practices
being a victim of sexual or other harassment
being forced to work under conditions that are dangerous to your health and safety
being a victim of discrimination based on your race, gender, sexual orientation, age, physical conditions, disability, etc. at your workplace
your employer owes you wages or refuses to pay you overtime pay or you are asked to work an excessive amount of overtime
you were given undue pressure by your employer or co-workers to resign
your wages have been greatly reduced, or your working conditions and position have changed significantly
you were subjected to unreasonably harsh or unfair treatment from your supervisor
you cannot continue working or doing a similar type of work because of health reasons
you need to care for a child or a member of your immediate family (However, you cannot receive employment insurance benefits while taking care for your family member because you need to be able and willing to find work in order to be eligible for benefits).

Even though the above reasons are considered just cause for leaving your employment, you will not automatically be eligible for regular employment insurance benefits. You will still be required to prove that you took measures to resolve the problems and quitting was the last and only option. For example, if you could not continue to work because of health reasons, you must show that you provided your employer with a doctor’s note and asked for a job transfer. If the employer refused to make the necessary arrangements and you have no choice but to resign, you would have just cause for quitting and be eligible for regular EI benefit.

If you became unemployed due to your personal negligence or misconduct, you are not eligible to receive employment insurance benefits. Examples of misconduct are :

Intentionally damaging company property
Lateness or being absent without permission
Becoming intoxicated during work hours
Not complying with supervisor’s instructions

If you were dismissed, but were not provided with a clear reason, or you think the dismissal was not for just cause, you should file a claim for EI benefits and provide your side of the story. If your application is turned down, you may seek legal advice and file an appeal.

If you lost your job due to your own fault or you voluntarily left your employment without just cause, the consequences are quite severe. You may be ineligible to get regular benefits and the hours of work you have accumulated from this job and from prior jobs will be deemed void for regular EI purposes. For example, you’ve accumulated the required hours of work by working at 3 separate jobs but if you were found not to have just cause for leaving any one of those jobs, all your accumulated hours before you quit your job with no just cause would become void. If there are problems at the workplace, you should seek legal advice before deciding to resign.

If you were dismissed or voluntarily resigned from your job, you have to explain the reason for your dismissal or resignation. This information will be used by the EI Office to investigate and to decide your eligibility.

If you resigned voluntarily, you must explain:

the reason for your resignation
what measures you took to resolve the problems prior to resigning
whether you searched for other jobs before resigning
If you were dismissed, you must explain:

the reason for your dismissal
whether the employer provided you with a warning beforehand
how you attempted to improve the situation

After you submit this information, Service Canada may contact you to conduct a telephone or in-person interview. They may also contact your employer to inquire about the situation and then decide whether there was just cause for your resignation or whether the dismissal was due to your wrongdoing. If your application is refused, you will receive a notification letter explaining the reason for the refusal. You may appeal this decision within 30 days of receiving the decision letter to the Board of Referees. This deadline is very important. You may seek help from a community agency or your local community legal clinic with the appeal.

If your application for regular EI benefits is refused based on reasons relating to losing your job, you may still use your accumulated insurable hours to apply for special employment insurance benefits including sickness, maternity, parental or compassionate care benefits. Your reason for unemployment will not affect your eligibility to apply for special employment insurance benefits.
Newbie
Oct 27, 2016
21 posts
3 upvotes
turtler wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 2:01 pm
What is considered an acceptable reason to quit? What is considered an unacceptable reason to quit?
Here is the gov/EI page that provides acceptable reasons, and what is required before someone resorts to quitting: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-soc ... t-job.html

She would (generally) have to provide evidence of her efforts to stay gainfully employed in the contract (see explanations in the link), and full justification for her actions though, eg. proof of the 'harassment' (or 'discrimination' or whatever). And then, even if she thinks she can provide that, they still might initially disqualify her (based on *someones* subjective opinion) ...

There is an appeal process (for whatever their decisions), but that is a long and stressful journey (see my prior post) too.
Deal Addict
Sep 22, 2013
1684 posts
579 upvotes
WhatToDo wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 3:16 pm
Here is the gov/EI page that provides acceptable reasons, and what is required before someone resorts to quitting: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-soc ... t-job.html

She would (generally) have to provide evidence of her efforts to stay gainfully employed in the contract (see explanations in the link), and full justification for her actions though, eg. proof of the 'harassment' (or 'discrimination' or whatever). And then, even if she thinks she can provide that, they still might initially disqualify her (based on *someones* subjective opinion) ...

There is an appeal process (for whatever their decisions), but that is a long and stressful journey (see my prior post) too.
You don't have to keep throwing in the part about someone's 'subjective opinion'. We get it. Your claim was initially denied and you're upset. It happens.

EI is fairly black and white and the initial decision maker was doing their job based on daily best practices. The SST is a third party entity and they can allow or deny an appeal whenever they want even if it doesn't necessarily go with what happens regularly on a day to day basis.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
OldMarriedGuy wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 7:15 pm
You don't have to keep throwing in the part about someone's 'subjective opinion'. We get it. Your claim was initially denied and you're upset. It happens.

EI is fairly black and white and the initial decision maker was doing their job based on daily best practices. The SST is a third party entity and they can allow or deny an appeal whenever they want even if it doesn't necessarily go with what happens regularly on a day to day basis.
Have some compassion. If not for all the people that have been wronged through subjective opinion, at least do it for the children. After all, every judge and jury should come to the same decision every time. Oh the injustice of our subjective systems. Compassion! The children!
Newbie
Oct 27, 2016
21 posts
3 upvotes
OldMarriedGuy wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 7:15 pm
You don't have to keep throwing in the part about someone's 'subjective opinion'. We get it. Your claim was initially denied and you're upset. It happens.

EI is fairly black and white and the initial decision maker was doing their job based on daily best practices. The SST is a third party entity and they can allow or deny an appeal whenever they want even if it doesn't necessarily go with what happens regularly on a day to day basis.
clseea wrote:
Jul 16th, 2017 8:21 pm
Have some compassion. If not for all the people that have been wronged through subjective opinion, at least do it for the children. After all, every judge and jury should come to the same decision every time. Oh the injustice of our subjective systems. Compassion! The children!
So which is it?:

“Breaking news, interpretations differ from person to person” and “Oh the injustice of our subjective systems.”

Or is it:

“EI is fairly black and white and the initial decision maker was doing their job based on daily best practices”

The initial decision maker isn’t actually making a ‘decision’ if they are simply following their black and white instructions on ‘best practice’, are they?

But what about the ‘review’ and ‘appeal’ decision makers … are they just following the same daily best practices too, or do they have authority to subjectively analyze extenuating circumstances? It isn’t really only the tribunal that can make decisions based on ALL the facts, is it?

Judges and juries (in a court room) are required to analyze the circumstances of a case before they reach their decision, just like the tribunal will. I’m not sure if their judgements will set precedence for future ‘best practice’ @ EI (as they would in a court room), but I would suggest that they should.

I am not upset at anyone; it is not the fault of the workers @ EI. I just think that a system that has set up ‘best practice’ paper-pushers, behind keyboards and form letters, is too rigid on occasion. I also think there should be qualified people that can do a thorough analysis, during ‘live’ interviews, when there is room for interpretation. I would hope that this could lead to better and more informed decisions.

The goal is to get people back to work, and any added stress is not going to help people, or society as a whole. So long as people are left desperate, bad employers may continue to abuse their power. It should be a win/win if we hope to remain a functional society, and that would be showing compassion for the children.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
Wow, 'that' was alot of 'typing'. I'm kind of 'dizzy' from 'reading it'. Take 'it' up with 'your' MP.
Deal Addict
Sep 22, 2013
1684 posts
579 upvotes
WhatToDo wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 2:34 pm
So which is it?:

“Breaking news, interpretations differ from person to person” and “Oh the injustice of our subjective systems.”

Or is it:

“EI is fairly black and white and the initial decision maker was doing their job based on daily best practices”

The initial decision maker isn’t actually making a ‘decision’ if they are simply following their black and white instructions on ‘best practice’, are they?

But what about the ‘review’ and ‘appeal’ decision makers … are they just following the same daily best practices too, or do they have authority to subjectively analyze extenuating circumstances? It isn’t really only the tribunal that can make decisions based on ALL the facts, is it?

Judges and juries (in a court room) are required to analyze the circumstances of a case before they reach their decision, just like the tribunal will. I’m not sure if their judgements will set precedence for future ‘best practice’ @ EI (as they would in a court room), but I would suggest that they should.

I am not upset at anyone; it is not the fault of the workers @ EI. I just think that a system that has set up ‘best practice’ paper-pushers, behind keyboards and form letters, is too rigid on occasion. I also think there should be qualified people that can do a thorough analysis, during ‘live’ interviews, when there is room for interpretation. I would hope that this could lead to better and more informed decisions.

The goal is to get people back to work, and any added stress is not going to help people, or society as a whole. So long as people are left desperate, bad employers may continue to abuse their power. It should be a win/win if we hope to remain a functional society, and that would be showing compassion for the children.
The system isn't perfect I get it. But people do the best they can. You cannot imagine how over loaded the program is.

Not everyone is always going to be happy and rules are in place for a reason. If everything was left up to interpretation then why bother having policy and guidelines in place?

Myself and many others have answered hundreds of questions and spent many hours reading and replying to posters on here.

To be honest, your comments and insuations (insults) to those that either work or have worked in the program make me wonder why I even bother...

I know there are people that are truly thankful for any help but really I don't have to 'waste' my time here if people are just going to fling insults because they didn't get 'the answer' they wanted to hear.
Newbie
Oct 27, 2016
21 posts
3 upvotes
clseea wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 3:16 pm
Wow, 'that' was alot of 'typing'. I'm kind of 'dizzy' from 'reading it'. Take 'it' up with 'your' MP.
If you think that was dizzying, you ought to try following the EI rules as a layperson. And it’s not like ‘ignorance’ can be any kind of defense.

OldMarriedGuy, I’ve said repeatedly that I appreciate the solid advice that you have provided people here, and I mean that sincerely. Thank you!

I also appreciate how hard it must be to work in an over-loaded environment, and think that needs to be fixed.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
WhatToDo wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 5:49 pm
If you think that was dizzying, you ought to try following the EI rules as a layperson. And it’s not like ‘ignorance’ can be any kind of defense.

OldMarriedGuy, I’ve said repeatedly that I appreciate the solid advice that you have provided people here, and I mean that sincerely. Thank you!

I also appreciate how hard it must be to work in an over-loaded environment, and think that needs to be fixed.
What did 'your' MP have to 'say'?
Newbie
Oct 27, 2016
21 posts
3 upvotes
clseea wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 7:26 pm
What did 'your' MP have to 'say'?
Do you REALLY want that answer?
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
WhatToDo wrote:
Jul 18th, 2017 11:44 am
Do you REALLY want that answer?
So 'you' haven't spoken to 'your' MP? REALLY?
Newbie
Oct 27, 2016
21 posts
3 upvotes
clseea wrote:
Jul 18th, 2017 12:19 pm
So 'you' haven't spoken to 'your' MP? REALLY?
It’s normally impossible to speak to a MP directly, especially within 3 hours. I know that there have been a number of times ITT where someone has recommended that the complainant get a hold of their MP to try to get some assistance with their EI case, but ….

Our MP’s are also sometimes filling federal Ministry positions, in addition to representing our communities. They aren’t just sitting there in their offices, waiting to personally respond to verbal citizen-concerns, within a few hrs.

In order to (potentially) get a constructive response out of a MP office, a person has to provide all the details (ideally in writing) in the hopes that (their assistants might pass it on to an incumbent, and) then perhaps the MP might read, prioritize, and be motivated/have enough time to do something about the issue.

Thanks for the prompting, but I probably shouldn't waste any more time on questions that will serve no useful purpose!

Bye for now ...
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
WhatToDo wrote:
Jul 18th, 2017 12:55 pm
It’s normally impossible to speak to a MP directly, especially within 3 hours. I know that there have been a number of times ITT where someone has recommended that the complainant get a hold of their MP to try to get some assistance with their EI case, but ….

Our MP’s are also sometimes filling federal Ministry positions, in addition to representing our communities. They aren’t just sitting there in their offices, waiting to personally respond to verbal citizen-concerns, within a few hrs.

In order to (potentially) get a constructive response out of a MP office, a person has to provide all the details (ideally in writing) in the hopes that (their assistants might pass it on to an incumbent, and) then perhaps the MP might read, prioritize, and be motivated/have enough time to do something about the issue.

Thanks for the prompting, but I probably shouldn't waste any more time on questions that will serve no useful purpose!

Bye for now ...
Those seem like some pretty lackluster excuses
Newbie
Jul 18, 2017
3 posts
My husband is on E.I. just had a heart attack. Fortunately he is recovering well but thinks he will be unable to work for 2 or 3 weeks. He does office work so the physical demands are not that bad. The doctor is rather vague telling him that he should be able to work once he feels up to it. Will he be able to receive his regular E.I. while he is recovering? Does he have to open a new claim for sick leave? What medical reports will he need to supply to Service Canada? Is there some sort of guide as to how much sick leave they allow after a heart attack? I am worried that he may not be ready to get out looking for work as soon as he thinks he can. If anyone can assist me I would appreciate it.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 21, 2011
8193 posts
1353 upvotes
Edmonton
seabreezenb wrote:
Jul 19th, 2017 5:17 am
My husband is on E.I. just had a heart attack. Fortunately he is recovering well but thinks he will be unable to work for 2 or 3 weeks. He does office work so the physical demands are not that bad. The doctor is rather vague telling him that he should be able to work once he feels up to it. Will he be able to receive his regular E.I. while he is recovering? Does he have to open a new claim for sick leave? What medical reports will he need to supply to Service Canada? Is there some sort of guide as to how much sick leave they allow after a heart attack? I am worried that he may not be ready to get out looking for work as soon as he thinks he can. If anyone can assist me I would appreciate it.
He'll need sick benefits not regular, he can't work right now. His doctor should provide medical documentation stating he's unable to work. He can collect up to 15 weeks of sick.

If he currently has a claim for regular he (or you once he gives the ok on the phone) need to convert the claim to sick benefits.

Top