The Board of Referees decision is quite well reasoned, which is not always the case in Board decisions in my experience. Here’s the issue. The parents had twins. The mother filed an EI claim for one child, and the father for the other child. The EI Commission denied the claim for the father, ruling that only one parent receive the benefit at a time, to a maximum claim of 35 weeks total per couple. Since the mother was already receiving benefits for the children, the father was not permitted to simultaneously claim benefits.
The father appealed successfully to the Board of Referees. The Board noted that the pregnancy and the post-birth period had been extremely difficult for the parents, and that caring for both children (and herself) proved too onerous for the mother alone. The key provision is Section 12 of the Employment Insurance Act. The Board rejected the argument that the language in that section provides for benefits only to one parent in the case of twins. Rather, according to the Board, it provides that an eligible claimant (both parents were eligible) can claim up to 35 weeks for the care of a child. Since both eligible parents were caring for different children, both claims could proceed at the same time. Insofar as there may be ambiguity in the language on this point, the Board noted (correctly) that since the EI Act is intended to provide a social benefit, it should be interpreted liberally in favour of the claimants. The result is that parents of twins are eligible to receive up to the maximum claim of 35 weeks EI benefits.
Does anyone think this decision is wrong, either legally or as a principle of social policy?