HR Blog

HR Blog
EI Ruling May Lead to Increase in Employees Taking Parental Leave
|
Published on September 21, 2009 | |
Stringer LLP Admin |
An Employment Insurance Board of Referees has decided that both parents of newborn twins qualified separately for 35 weeks of employment insurance parental benefits.
Christian Martin’s wife gave birth twin girls who were premature, underweight and required constant care and attention. The Board heard evidence that the parents were overwhelmed and exhausted caring for the babies and as a result of complications during the pregnancy. The added complications required Mr. Martin to assist with the ongoing care, and would keep him out of work for approximately 35 weeks.
The parents each applied for 35 weeks of parental benefits. The mother received the full benefits for one infant, while Mr. Martin was denied benefits for the other. Mr. Martin appealed the decision. The Board focussed on the fact that Mr. Martin had to take time off work to care for the twins and allowed his appeal.
While this decision has no precedential value, Boards of Referees tend to be relatively deferential to one another. As such, it is likely that this decision will impact and increase future claims for parental benefits in the case of multiple births.
The EI Commission has 60 days to appeal the decision to the Federal Court. In the event that the decision stands, employers should be prepared for an increase in parental leave requests where an employee’s wife gives birth to multiple babies.
A copy of the decision can be found at http://www.scribd.com/doc/19865129/EI-Board-of-Referees-Decision-on-twins.
Ryan Conacher - rconacher@sbhlawyers.com
Subscribe to Blog feed
Recent Blog
- Court Signals Summary Judgement Often Appropriate for Wrongful Dismissal Actions
- Minister Jason Kenney Announces changes to the Immigration System to Promote Canadian Labour Market
- Landmark Decision on Certification of ESA Class Actions and Constructive Dismissal
- OLRB rules on electrician exemption in construction regulation
- What Does the Crown Have to Prove in an OHSA Prosecution?
- The Supreme Court to Lay Down the Law on Random Alcohol Testing
- OLRB Directs Inspector to Produce Investigation Records
- Employer Successfully Defends a Charge of Failing to Report an Accident to WSIB
- Minor Change to the OLRB’s Rules of Procedure could have a Major Impact
- Debate Continues over Family Caregiver Leave
- Divisional Court provides Guidance as to What Constitutes a Prima Facie Case of Discrimination
- Forum Shopping a Growing Problem - Published in The Lawyers Weekly
- Bill 168 and Section 50 of the OHSA: Has the Labour Board Closed the Floodgates?
- Proposed Family Caregiver Leave goes through Second Reading
- British Columbia Court of Appeal upholds just cause dismissal
- The Latest on Forum Shopping: The Human Rights Tribunal is Considering Whether a WSIB Case Manager Decision is a “Proceeding”
- Employees in fiduciary relationships may be entitled to bonuses even upon breach of duties
- ONCA Upholds Brito but Quashes Punitive Award
- Invasion of Privacy in the Workplace Could Lead to Liability for Snooping Employees
- Human Rights Tribunal Heeding Clear Direction from Supreme Court
- Taking a Hard Line on Termination Entitlements Ends Up Costing More
Categories
- aoda
- class actions
- construction labour relations
- constructive dismissal
- disability benefits
- employment insurance
- employment law
- employment standards
- fiduciary duties
- first nations
- general litigation
- human rights
- immigration
- labour law
- occupational health and safety
- privacy
- restrictive covenants
- stringer llp announcements
- workers' compensation
- wrongful dismissal litigation


