Employment Insurance Regulations - Amendments

The following information is out of date.

---

Description

All the amendments to the Employment Insurance Regulations (EI) are of a technical nature. They do not reflect substantive changes to the regulations they modify, but rather make minor non-substantive clarifications.

Subsections 17.1 (4), (5) (6), (7), (10), (11), (12) and (13)

Due to an oversight, the dates in the EI boundary transition regulations for New Brunswick and Quebec do not match with Statistics Canada's planned release dates in October 2002 and October 2003. Unless corrected, this means that there would be an unemployment rate in those two regions that would apply for just one week in each of those years, that of October 6, 2002 and that of October 5, 2003.

The transition date for October 2002 should be October 13 instead of the current October 6, and the one for October 2003 should be October 12 instead of the current October 5. The correction of this oversight will benefit unemployed persons by extending the transitional provisions by one week in each of those two years.

Subsection 23 (1)

This subsection does not now specifically set out how to allocate insurable earnings when calculating the weekly rate of benefits. This minor amendment is consistent with current practices and is intended only to clarify how such insured earnings are, in fact, being allocated.

Subsection 31 (2)

When the text of subsection 31 (2) of the EI Regulations was simplified in 1996, its meaning was inadvertently altered. The definition of what constitutes a "full working week" was altered for part-time workers. It should have referred to the "hours, days or shifts" worked but now only refers to "hours". By rewording the subsection to refer to "hours, days or shifts", we ensure that the intent is clearer.

Subsection 34 (1)

SOR/99-290 amended subsection 34(5) of the EI Regulations so that the terms "adjusted income" and "base taxation year" are no longer used in section 34. Due to an oversight, subsection 34 (1) of the EI Regulations still refers to these terms. Those references are no longer relevant and are being deleted. This oversight has been pointed out to Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) by Counsel for the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of the Regulations.

Subsection 35 (6)

The amendment adds the words "and allowances that would not be deducted from benefits by virtue of subsection 16(1)" to this subsection.

It was always intended that all training allowances be ignored for EI benefit purposes when the claimant is legitimately directed to a course of instruction. Due to an oversight, training allowances that are not deductible from EI benefits under subsection 16(1) of the EI Regulations are being taken into account for purposes of establishing an interruption of earnings under subsection 35 (6) of the EI Regulations. This amendment will correct the oversight, restore equity and uniformity of treatment for such money and confirm the intent of the 1996 regulatory changes.

Subsection 37 (1)

This subsection states that Supplemental Unemployment Benefits (SUB) are not earnings for the purposes of section 19, subsections 21 (3), 22(5) and 23(3) or sections 45 and 46 of the Act. The reference to subsections 22 (5) and 23 (3) of the Act are being deleted.

Subsection 22 (5) concerns earnings to be deducted when paying EI maternity benefits. Top-ups of EI benefits by the employer payable during maternity or parental leave are not earnings to be deducted and are excluded under section 38 of the EI Regulations. Therefore, a reference to section 22 of the EI Act is redundant.

Subsection 23 (3) of the EI Act was repealed effective from December 31, 2000. It is therefore being deleted from subsection 37 (1) of the EI Regulations.

Subsection 53 (3)

This subsection now refers to exceptional actions taken by an employer during a work stoppage when deciding if there has been at least an 85% resumption of work at the end of a labor dispute. However, it does not cover exceptional measures taken by an employer before a work stoppage.

It is fair to all parties in a labor dispute to take into consideration all exceptional measures both before and during a labor dispute when determining whether or not an 85% resumption of work has occurred. This change reflects current well-established jurisprudence and simply makes the meaning of the regulation clearer.

Section 84

The Standing Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations has noted that this section contains a redundancy. There are two grounds of appeal listed, "…that the board erred in law or did not take into account a provision of the Act or these Regulations". The second ground "or did not take into account a provision of the Act or these Regulations" is included in the first ground "erred in law". As a result, the second ground is being deleted.

These miscellaneous regulatory amendments have no additional costs related to the payments made to claimants from the EI Account or to administrative costs for employers or for the government. They are intended to enhance the clarity of the regulations, correct certain oversights and ensure consistency in the application of the EI Regulations. It is expected that these changes will, in some cases, improve service to clients but will not have any negative impact on Canadians.

Contact

Jim Little
Senior Policy Advisor
Policy and Legislation Development, Insurance Branch
Human Resources Development Canada
9th Floor, 140 Promenade du Portage
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0J9
Telephone: (819) 997-8628
FAX: (819) 953-9381