Employment Insurance (EI)

Introduction

[1] The Claimant applied for employment insurance (EI) regular benefits. The Canada Employment Insurance Commission (Commission) decided that the Claimant could not be paid benefits because he didn’t have enough hours of insurable employment.

[2] The Claimant asked the Commission to reconsider its decision because he had an agreement with his employer to work reduced hours in the last year of his employment. He had worked full-time hours for years before that. So, he shouldn’t be subject to a minimum number of hours to qualify for EI benefits.

[3] The Claimant asks the Tribunal to consider extending his qualifying period. He had hip surgery, which made him unable to perform certain aspects of his job. Though he was still able to keep working.

Issue

[4] I must decide whether the appeal should be summarily dismissed.

Analysis

[5] I must summarily dismiss an appeal if I am satisfied that it has no reasonable chance of success.^{Footnote 1}

[6] A claimant can receive EI benefits if they qualify to receive them.^{Footnote 2} To qualify for benefits, a claimant must have the required number of hours of insurable employment in their qualifying period.^{Footnote 3} A qualifying period can be the 52-week period immediately before the period in which benefits are paid.^{Footnote 4}

[7] The Claimant applied for EI regular benefits on February 9, 2022. The Commission determined his qualifying period to be from January 30, 2021, to January 29, 2022. The Claimant required 420 hours of insurable employment to qualify for benefits.^{Footnote 5}

[8] The Commission determined that the Claimant had 359 hours in his qualifying period.

[9] Before summarily dismissing an appeal, I must send written notice to the Claimant and allow him time to make submissions.^{Footnote 6}

[10] Given that the evidence on record does not show that the Claimant had enough hours of insurable employment to qualify for benefits, I sent notice of my intention to summarily dismiss this appeal on May 19, 2022. The Claimant provided additional submissions that have been considered in this decision.

[11] The Claimant submitted to the Tribunal that he feels the minimum number of hours shouldn’t apply in his case. It should only apply to people who have collected EI benefits previously. He has never collected EI benefits before because he has always been employed. Now that he is unemployed, he needs the financial support.

[12] He also believes he should qualify for an extension to his qualifying period. He had hip replacement surgery in February 2021, and wasn’t able to perform the physical aspects of his job.

[13] I find the Claimant’s appeal has no reasonable chance of success because an insured person must have the required number of hours of insurable employment in their qualifying period to qualify for EI benefits. It is undisputed that the Claimant only accumulated 359 hours of insurable employment in his qualifying period, while he required at least 420 hours to qualify for benefits.^{Footnote 7}

[14] If the Claimant qualified for an extension to his qualifying period, he may have additional hours to help him establish a claim for EI benefits. However, the Claimant has not proven that he qualifies for an extension to his qualifying period.

[15] Your qualifying period can be extended if you were unable to work because of illness or injury for a time during your qualifying period.^{Footnote 8} The Claimant said he had neck surgery in January 2022 but did not miss work for that reason. He also had hip surgery in February 2021. This surgery prevented him from doing the physical aspects of his job, but he acknowledges that he was able to continue working on the computer.^{Footnote 9} The evidence supports that the Claimant wasn’t unable to work during his qualifying period because of an illness or injury. So, he doesn’t qualify for an extension to his qualifying period.

[16] The Claimant did not provide any additional evidence to demonstrate that he had enough insurable hours to qualify for benefits.

[17] I understand that the Claimant feels he should not be subject to a minimum number of hours to qualify for benefits. But, I am bound to apply the law no matter how compassionate the circumstances.^{Footnote 10} The law requires claimants to meet certain conditions to qualify for EI benefits, including having a minimum number of hours of insurable employment in their qualifying period.

[18] In this case, the law is clear that the Claimant’s appeal has no reasonable chance of success. It is plain and obvious on the face of the record that the appeal is bound to fail, regardless of the evidence or arguments that the Claimant could present at a hearing. Therefore, I must summarily dismiss his appeal.

Conclusion

[19] I find that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success; therefore the appeal is summarily dismissed.