Kelly Lesiuk | Compassionate
Care Legislative Challenge | Recent Reports |
EI Coverage | EI Surplus | How you can help
EI Coverage | EI Surplus | How you can help
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
In 1996, Employment Insurance eligibility requirements were changed from a weeks-based system to an hours-based system. In 1998, Kelly Lesiuk applied for Employment Insurance benefits. She had been working part-time as a nurse, but had been forced to give up her job when her family moved from Brandon to Winnipeg. Because she had only worked 667 hours in the previous year her EI application was denied. She was denied regular EI benefits, and EI maternity and parental benefits. Under the old rules she would have qualified for these benefits based on the number of weeks she had worked.
The decision had a significant impact on her family and its finances. In her words, “We made a costly assumption, that our government would be there when we needed them. We were terribly wrong
The CUHC, along with the Public Interest Law Centre, represented Lesiuk in challenging the legislation on the basis of its negative impact on women in the workforce. She argued that the hours-based system discriminates against women because it makes it very hard for part-time workers to qualify for benefits. Seven of every ten part-time workers is female, due in large part to social expectations that women are responsible for child rearing and most domestic labour.
Lesiuk won her appeal at the level of the Umpire (see the Umpire decision); however, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned the decision (see the FCA decision). The Supreme Court of Canada then refused to hear the case (see the Supreme Court decision).