I APPEAL# P AR T C-D e cision unde r Appeal The decisi on u nder appeal is t he M inistry o f Social Devel opment a nd S ocial Innovation (the " mi nistry") Reconsideration D ec ision of M a rc h 5, 20 1 4 in which the ministry den i e d income assistance ( I A) to th e app e l lan t for faili ng to co mpl e te the employm ent search requirement for a new a pplicant for assist ance, as required by Sec tions 4 and 4.1 of the Empl o yment and As sistance Regu lation (E A R). PART D -Relevant Legisl ation Em ploy m e n t and Assi st a n ce Ac t (EAA ) S ectio ns 1 and 2 Em ploy m e n t and Assi sta nce Re gulati o n (EA R ) Sectio ns 4, 4 . 1 and 47 .2 EAA T003(10/06/01)
I APPEAL PART E -Summarv of Facts The evidence before the ministry at the time of the Reconsideration Decision consisted of the following documents: 1. Letter dated November 4, 2013 from the appellant's family physician stating that the appellant suffers from a shoulder injury that impairs his ability to perform labour-type work. 2 . Ministry form "Reasonable Work Search Activities Guidelines" signed by the appellant on November 19, 2013 with a 14-day work search review date of December 9, 2013; 3. Hand-printed record detailing 35 job search activities for the period November 10, 2013 to an unknown date in December; 4. Ministry form 'Work Search Review" (2 pages) dated January 29, 2014; 5. Request for Reconsideration dated February 20, 2014 with the following attachments: i. One-page handwritten letter written by the appellant which stated that: • he has been actively looking for work but has severe shoulder and arm pain, migraine headaches and poor circulation • his only transportation is a bicycle which he cannot ride in cold weather • he had trouble printing the necessary documents from a borrowed computer • he has been told by two companies that he will be called for work but so far has not been called ii. Doctor's note dated February 20, 2014 indicating that the patient suffers from a shoulder injury and a possible hernia, and is unable to do labour work for the next 3-6 weeks at which time he should be re-evaluated by his general practitioner. 6 . Undated handwritten letter (3 pages) from the appellant addressed "To Whom It May Concern" in support of his request for reconsideration advising as follows: • He has been actively searching for work through daily faxes, calls, messages for 2 months before Christmas • He was hired for light-duty ceiling work • He has fractures to his foot, wrist and collarbone, a separated shoulder, hernia and intestinal problems that cause severe testicular pain and can't afford pain medication • The combination of job searching, medical appointments and ministry appointments have been very stressful • He gets his food from the food bank and garbage bins • His phone has been cut off, and he needs a bus pass and a swimming pool pass for his rehabilitation. 7. Eviction notice for non-payment of rent dated February 17, 2014 from the appellant's landlord. The Reconsideration Decision is summarized as follows: • The appellant is a sole recipient of hardship assistance (HA) with no dependants. • On November 13, 2013 he submitted a doctor's note which stated that due to an injured shoulder the appellant was unable to continue in his previous line of work, which was in drywalling and other strenuous labour-type work. • Also on November 13, 2013 a ministry employee telephoned the appellant to explain work search guidelines and expectations and to advise him to search for work outside of the labour sector. • On November 19, 2013 the appellant failed to complete the 5 week employment search requirement for a new IA applicant. Because he faced eviction and the possibility of being homeless he was deemed eliqible for HA pendinq completion of the 5 week employment EAAT003(10/06/01)
search requirement. • On Nove mber 21, 2013 the app ellant attende Work Search Gu i d el ines, which required a minimum of 25 hou va riety of work search a ctivities, m inimu m contact with 1 of at least 5 diff erent work sea rc h acti vities, op portuni ties in a ll occupations a n d at all w ages. • On Dec ember 9, 2013 the ministry advised t he employment search before being el i g i b le for ass • On December 18, 2013 the ministry a dvised the appellant that he would no February ass i s t a n ce unless he submitted his 5 wee • On January 16, 2014 the ministry discontinue be cause h e had not submitted his 5 week employment sear • O n J anuary 2 9 t he appellant s ubmitted a one-page op inion of the ministry did not sati s fy the criteria for a appellant was ther e fo re d eni ed assi stan c e becaus com p let ed a 5 week se arch fo r empl oyment v erifica t i on t h a t was satisfactory to the m i nis In his Notice of A ppeal dated M arc h 12, 2014 the appe min istry's decision beca u s e he w as h av ing surgery s hould excl ud e hi m from a work s earch at the prese No a dditional docum e nt ary ev i dence was s ubm i t ted at the st ate d th at in M a y 20 12 h e se p a rate d his shoul der in a work-at an or chard, in a n e f fort to s up po rt him self. He ha with the mini stry, so h e d id all his med ic al work in a r s h oulder and needs surgery for an intestin al hernia s h oulder an d testicu l ar pain. He ac knowled g ed that t o h im br ie fly , bu t f elt h e was n ot given enou gh ti me an d was i nst ea d just referr ed to Work BC fo r assistance with hi an d avai labl e prog rams. H e realizes that he missed an impo g et to the ministry o ff i c e b ecaus e the weath er was to transportatio n o r mon ey f or the bu s. In de scribing the ministry he explained th at there were two mor e pa ges unable to retri eve fr om the c omputer. H e is now four m imminent eviction. When asked why the work search record he submitte on ly of at tempts to find work in labour-related fields he stat getting the certificates and qualifications necessary for lighter work, adding that he had to deal with his migraine pa in fi rst. He obtained the "Serving It Right" tra Work BC, but "nothing panned out". T he oral e vid e n ce provided by th e a p pe llant at the hearin reiteration of the evidence he provided in his Request for Reconsideratio the ministry which are noted on Page 3 of this decision, Numbers The ministry relied on its Reconsideration Decision and provided a written submission which included the following points: • The annellant received a oro-rated HA of $508.17 for the month of November, 2013 and EMT003(10/06/01) I APPE AL d the ministry office and receive d a copy of the rs of ef fort per week using a 5 employers per wee k, consistent use a nd a demonstrated search for employment appella nt that he had t o compl e t e his 5 wee k i s t a n ce. t be eli gible fo r k emplo yment search record. d ass istance chequ e production for the appe llant ch record. e mployment search r ecord which in t he 5 week em ployment sea r c h record. T h e e he fa i le d to dem o nstrate that he had and to provide se arc h-relat ed i nformati o n an d t e r, as r eq u i r ed by sec tio ns 4 an d 4. 1 of the E A R. ll a nt s tat ed that he disagreed with the soo n, nee ds help, a nd that hi s d oc t or 's not e nt tim e. h e ar in g . In his oral ev ide nce the app e l lan t p lace ac cident w h ile l ivi ng and work in g s litt le e x per ienc e wi th doc t o rs and no e x pe r ie nc e ush. He is aw aitin g sur gery for his s eparated a nd in the me ant ime experienc es extreme t he work s earc h requir em ent h a d bee n e x p laine d t o ta l k t o a mini stry employee about the details, s r esume, jo b sea r chin g strategies rtant appoi ntme n t , bu t he w a s unab l e to o cold to ride his b ic ycle, he di d not have work se arch recor d that he submitted to t he of work sear ch documentation t hat he w as onths behind in his rent and is f acing d to the ministry consis ted ed that he was "lost" wh en it c a me to i n ing book a nd ot her pamphle ts f r om g w as not new ev idence, but w as a n, specifically in his letters to 5 (i) and 6.
$610. 00 HA monthly in D e ce m b er, 2013 a n d Janu • T he app el lant did not meet the crite ria f or a wo that he re ce i v ed when he a p pl ied for IA, inc luding: o a m in imum of 25 hour s o f search e f for o contact w ith at le ast 1 5 po t e nt i a l emp o co nsis t e nt use of at lea st 5 differ ent w c ounselor , taking a cour se, pr eparing boo k, and go i n g door to doo r; o consi d e rat i on of all ty pes of employm en o consi d e rat i on of all wages, incl uding minimum wage. • Although t h e a p pellan t s ubmitt e d two l etters from phys from his doc tor ad v i s i ng that h e is un ab le t o co empl oyment pr ograms or wo rksho ps which c b ecoming m ore em plo ya ble . • The appell a n t was not cons idered for HA when e viction becaus e he had been deni ed IA on Ja e mploym ent searc h a nd was therefo r e n o l onger In cl osi ng s ubm i ss i ons the appella nt's advocate arg u n ders tan d i ng of what he n e eded from th e doct or, a attending w orks ho ps and undert aki ng wo rk se arch activi phy s i cian, wh ich made it m ore diff icul t f o r h im to o b t added t h at his sh o ulde r i n j ury is one of th e wo rst t h e d him to tape his shoulder ag ai n st his b o dy, w h i ch p reclu Th e m ini s t r y rel ie d on t he rec onside ratio n decision a hearing . EAAT003(10/06/01) I APPEAL a r y , 2014 rk se a r ch se t out in t he Work Searc h Gu idel ines t per w eek us ing a v a ri ety o f searc h activ itie s; loy ers p er we ek; ork search a c t ivities such as spe a ki n g w ith a job a resu m e , l ooki n g online, pe ru sing the phone t , and ici a ns , he did not su bmit an y i n formation mp l ete light duty employment or at tend oul d assist h im with hi s wor k sear ch and he su bm itt ed his F ebr u a r y 17, 2 0 1 4 notic e o f nu a ry 29 th due to t h e a b s en c e of a satisfact ory el i gible for HA. ued th at t he appe llant had a lac k of n d t h at his c h r o nic p ain g o t in the way of h i s tie s. T h e appe llant doe s n o t ha ve a r eg ul ar ain the informatio n h e needed . The app el lant o ctor has seen , and that t he docto r advise d d e s most ty pes o f ph ys i c al w ork. nd o n i ts w ritt en su bmi s si o n te ndered at the
P A R T F R e a s o n s f o r P a n e l D e c i s i o n T h e i s s u e u n d e r a p p e a l i s t h e r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f t h a s s i s t a n c e ( I A ) t o t h e a p p e l l a n t f o r f a i l i n g t o c o m p l e a p p l i c a n t f o r a s s i s t a n c e , a s r e q u i r e d b y S e c t i o n s 4 R e g u l a t i o n ( E A R ) . T h e r e l e v a n t l e g i s l a t i o n i s a s f o l l o w s : E A A : E l i g i b i l i t y o f f a m i l y u n i t 2 F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s A c t , a f a m i l y h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t ( a ) e a c h p e r s o n i n t h e f a m h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e o r s u c o n t i n u i n g c o n d i t i o n s o f e l ( b ) t h e f a m i l y u n i t h a s n o t h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e o r s u E A R : P r o c e s s f o r a s s e s s m e n t o f e l i g i b i l i t y f o r i n c o m e 4 T h e e l i g i b i l i t y o f a f a m i l y u n i t f o r i n c o m e a s s s t a g e p r o c e s s s e t o u t i n s e c t i o n s 4 . 1 a n d A p p l i c a t i o n f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e s t a g e 1 4 . 1 ( 1 ) T h e f i r s t s t a g e o f t h e p r o c e s s f o r a s s e s a s s i s t a n c e i s f u l f i l l i n g t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o ( 2 ) T h e a p p l i c a n t s f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e ( a ) m u s t c o m p l e t e a n d s u b a s s i s t a n c e ( p a rt 1 ) f o r m a n ( i ) t h e s o c i a l i n s u r a w h o i s a p e r s o n d e s ( i i ) t h e i n f o r m a t i o n s p e c i f i e d b y t h e m i n a s s i s t a n c e ( p a r t 1 ) ( b ) s u b j e c t t o s u b s e c t i o n s ( i ) c o m p l e t e s e a r c h t h e a p p l i c a b l e p e r i o d a t e o f t h e a p p l i c a t i ( i i ) d e m o n s t r a t e t h E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A L I e m i n i s t r y d e c i s i o n w h i c h d e n i e d i n c o m e t e t h e e m p l o y m e n t s e a r c h r e q u i r e m e n t f o r a n e w a n d 4 . 1 o f t h e E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e u n i t i s e l i g i b l e , i n r e l a t i o n t o i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , , i f i l y u n i t o n w h o s e a c c o u n t t h e i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , p p l e m e n t i s p r o v i d e d s a t i s f i e s t h e i n i t i a l a n d i g i b i l i t y e s t a b l i s h e d u n d e r t h i s A c t , a n d b e e n d e c l a r e d i n e l i g i b l e f o r t h e i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , p p l e m e n t u n d e r t h i s A c t . a s s i s t a n c e i s t a n c e m u s t b e a s s e s s e d o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e 2 4 . 2 . s i n g t h e e l i g i b i l i t y o f a f a m i l y u n i t f o r i n c o m e f s u b s e c t i o n ( 2 ) . i n a f a m i l y u n i t m i t t o t h e m i n i s t e r a n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r i n c o m e d m u s t i n c l u d e a s p a r t o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n n c e n u m b e r o f e a c h a p p l i c a n t i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n 7 ( 2 ) , a n d , a u t h o r i z a t i o n s , d e c l a r a t i o n s a n d v e r i f i c a t i o n s i s t e r , a s r e q u i r e d i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r i n c o m e f o r m , a n d ( 4 ) a n d ( 6 ) , m u s t e s f o r e m p l o y m e n t a s d i r e c t e d b y t h e m i n i s t e r f o r d u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 2 . 1 ) i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g t h e o n u n d e r p a r a g r a p h ( a ) , o r a t e a c h o f t h e a p p l i c a n t s h a s c o m p l e t e d a s e a r c h
for employment satis p rior to t h e date of t and in eit her c a se pro sear c hes fo r empl oyment, (2.1) The app licabl e period for t h e pu rpose (a) 3 wee ks , if any a p plicant in t ( b) 5 weeks in any other c a ( 3 ) Subse c ti on (2) does no t affect t h e min ( 4) Subse c ti on (2) (b ) doe s not apply t o a ( a ) is prohibit ed by law from workin (b ) has re ac he d 65 years of a ( c ) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 48/2 (d) h as a phy s ic al or men t a pr ec l udes t h e pe rson fr o m by th e minist er , or (e) is fleeing a n abusiv e s pouse (f ) Repea led. [B.C. Reg . 6/2008, ( 5) Re pea led. [B . C. Reg. 197/2012, S c h. 1, s. 3 ( 6) Subsecti on (2 ) (b ) doe s not apply to a s (a) has a d e pend e n t child, (b ) pr ovides care to a foster child referred to in s e ction 8 o r 93 ( Serv ice Act if the chil d h as n ot r e ached 3 y ears o f age Appli cation for income assistance -stage 2 4.2 (1) In this section, "applica nt orientation program" means a progr minister to ensure that appli cants are provided with information about their rights and obligations under the Act, including but not limited to information about all or any combination of (a) r u les abou t elig i bility for income a (b) the process of applying for disabilit (c) required employment search activities, community based job search resourc es a n d ministry and community pro (d) mutual obligations of the minis /e) emolovment plans, EMT 003(10/06/01) I AP PE AL factory to the min ist er with in the 3 0 day period h e appl i cation u nder pa r a graph ( a), vi de informa tio n a bo ut and v erifi c a tio n of the in t h e form s pecified b y the minis ter . s of su bs ec t ion ( 2) (b) (i) i s h e famil y uni t i s a f o r mer r ecipie nt, and se. iste r's p o wers under secti on 10 of the A ct. per son who g in C a nada, ge, 0 10 , Sch. 1, s. 1 (b).] l conditi o n t h at , i n th e minister's opinio n , co m plet i ng a s ea r ch for em pl oyment as directed or re lative . s. 1.] (e ) .] o le a p plicant w ho o r or a c hil d in their ca re under an agreem ent 1 ) (g) ( i i) of the C h il d , Fa m ily and Commun ity . am es t ablished b y the ssistance or supplements, y assistance, g rams, te r, applic a n ts and re c ipients,
I APPEAL· (f) the minister's authority to collect and verify information, and (g) the availability of alternate resources, such as, federal programs and other Provincial programs. (2) The second stage of the process for assessing the eligibility of a family unit for income assistance is fulfilling the requirements of subsection (3). (3) Subject to section 47.2 (2), on completion of the first stage process provided for in section 4.1, the applicants for income assistance in the family unit must complete and submit to the minister an application for income assistance (part 2) form and must include as part of the application (a) proof of the identity of the persons in the family unit and of their eligibility under the Act, (b) subject to subsection (5), proof that the applicants have each completed an applicant orientation program, and (c) the information, authorizations, declarations and verifications specified by the minister as required in the application for income assistance (part 2) form. (4) Subsection (3) does not affect the minister's powers under section 1 O of the Act. (5) Subsection (3) (b) does not apply to a person who (a) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 48/2010, Sch. 1, s. 1 (b).] (b) has reached 65 years of age, (c) is not described in 7 (2) [citizenship requirements] and is in a family unit that satisfies the requirement under section 7 (1) , or (d) has a physical or mental condition that, in the minister's opinion, precludes the person from completing an applicant orientation program. Applicants who do not meet work search requirements 47.2 (1) The minister may provide hardship assistance to a family unit that is ineligible for income assistance because a member of the family unit has not satisfied the requirement under section 4.1 (2) (b) respecting the completion of searches for employment, if (a) the applicants who submitted the application for income assistance (part 1) form also submit to the minister an application for income assistance (part 2) form that, subject to this section, complies with section 4.2, and (b) the minister considers that (i) any person in the family unit has an immediate need for food or shelter or needs urgent medical attention, and (ii) undue hardship will occur if the hardship assistance is not provided. (2) An aoolicant mav submit an aoolication for income assistance /oart 2) form under EAAT003(10/06/01)
I APPEAL subsection (1) (a) for the purpose of applying for hardship assistance even though the requirements under section 4.1 (2) (b) respecting the completion of searches for employment have not been satisfied. The appellant argues that he suffers from serious health issues, including a separated shoulder, hernia, migraine headaches and poor circulation. He is in constant pain, and because of his physical impairments and pain he has been unable to complete his 5 week employment search requirement, to the satisfaction of the ministry. He did not understand what information he needed from his doctor to demonstrate the severity of his injuries and other physical impairments that may preclude him from completing searches for employment. He has no transportation other than his bicycle, and cannot ride on cold days. He has had difficulty retrieving his complete work search records from the computer in which he stored them. He is unable to work in the labour sector and has not been able to complete the certificate courses that might help him in finding a less strenuous job. He is now four months behind in his rent and is facing imminent eviction. The ministry argues that the appellant did not follow the criteria for a work search set out in the Work Search Guidelines that he received when he applied for IA, in addition to blank Work Search Activities Records which could be filled in by hand as he completed specific activities. Upon review of the work search record submitted by the appellant the ministry is not satisfied that he has completed the 5 week employment search required for a new applicant applying for assistance. Further, he did not provide evidence from his doctor advising that he is unable to work at light labour jobs or attend employment programs that will assist him in finding employment. Because he failed to complete the 5 week employment search required by EAR Section 4.1 and does not meet the work search exemptions set out in EAR Section 4.1 he is not eligible for income assistance. Decision of the Panel The panel finds that the appellant did not provide sufficient evidence from his doctor to indicate that he is unable to complete light duty employment or attend employment programs or workshops which could assist him in his work search and in becoming more employable. The panel finds also that the ministry reasonably determined that the appellant does not meet the criteria set out in Section 4.1 (4) of the EAR of a person who does not have to complete a 5 week employment search because of a physical or mental condition that precludes him from completing a search for employment. The appellant is therefore required to complete a 5 week employment search and provide information about and verification of his employment search that is satisfactory to the minister. The panel finds that the employment search record submitted to the ministry by the appellant does not meet the criteria set out in the Work Search Guidelines. Therefore the panel finds that the ministry reasonably determined that the appellant failed to complete and submit a search for employment satisfactory to the minister as required by EAR Section 4.1 and as a result is ineligible for income assistance. Accordingly this panel finds that the decision of the ministry to deny income assistance to the appellant for failing to complete a 5 week employment plan and search requirements is a reasonable application of the applicable legislation in the circumstances of the appellant, and confirms the decision of the ministry. EAA T003(10/06/01)
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.