Astronomo v. Canada ( Attorney General )
A-141-97
McDonald J.A.
10/7/98
4 pp.
Application for judicial review of Umpire's decision dismissing appeal from Board finding applicant did not have just cause to leave employment under Act, s. 28(1)-Applicant had been working as housekeeper for 13 years when left for brief period on maternity leave-Left employment after informed her full-time day position being given to junior employee who had qualifications as care aide, which applicant did not possess-Employer had offered two alternatives, but neither allowed her to work full-time during day (necessity as husband working night shift and caring for child during day)-Commission first granted UI benefits on ground she had established just cause but Board and Umpire found otherwise-Umpire found issue of just cause implicitly considered by Board when it found employer had in good faith made reasonable offers of employment to applicant-Application allowed-Umpire's decision disagreed with as Board did not fully consider whether applicant had just cause for leaving employment-By focusing almost exclusively on issue of whether employer's re-organization of business done in good faith, Board failed to have proper regard for statutory test for just cause found in Act, s. 28(4)-Test to be applied having regard to all circumstances whether, on balance of probabilities, claimant had no reasonable alternative to immediately leaving employment-Reorganization, dealt with in s. 28(4)(g) and (i), not exclusive focus of subsection-Board failed to properly consider whether applicant had no reasonable alternative to leaving her employment, which is test for just cause as prescribed by Act, s. 28(4)-Focus of exercise should be to determine whether reasonable alternative to applicant placing herself on rolls of unemployed for insurance purposes, as referred to in Tanguay-Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. U-1 s. 28(4) (as am. by S.C. 1993, c. 13, s. 19).