Schontala v Engine Power Components
Digest no. 7.31
Cite as: Schontala v Engine Power Components, Ottawa Circuit Court, No. 86-8221-AE (October 27, 1987).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Timothy Schontala
Employer: Engine Power Components
Docket no.: B85-11974-101743W
Date of decision: October 27, 1987
CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Where claimant asserted he was available for full time work but showed by his actions that, in fact, he was not, he did not meet the availability requirement for eligibility under Section 28(1)(c).
FACTS: After working full time for the employer for over a year, claimant requested reduction to part-time work so he could return to school. Claimant was granted part-time status but shortly thereafter was laid off due to lack of work for part-time employees. Claimant was attending school and placed numerous applications for part-time work. He applied for benefits while still in school when he could not find any part-time work. Claimant asserted that he would accept full-time employment but Referee did not find his testimony credible.
DECISION: Claimant is ineligible for benefits.
RATIONALE: Determination of genuine attachment to the labor market is made by means of a subjective test which looks at the actions of the individual. In this case, claimant quit his full time employment, requested part-time status, enrolled in school nearly full-time, and subsequently applied for part-time work. See test enunciated in Dwyer v UCC, 321 Mich 178, 189 (1948).
Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated: 7/99