P A R T C D e c i s i o n u n d e r A p p e a l T h e d e c i s i o n u n d e r a p p e a l i s t h e M i n i s t r y o f S o c i a l D e v R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n D e c i s i o n d a t e d J u n e 1 7 , 2 0 1 4 , w h i c h f T h e M i n i s t r y d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e A p p e l l a n t r e c e i v e d h a E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e R e g u l a t i o n f o r t h r e e c o n s e i n t h e l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t w o u l d p e r m i t t h e i s s u a n c e o f f u r t h P A R T D R e l e v a n t L e g i s l a t i o n E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e A c t ( E A A ) s e c t i o n s 1 , 5 E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e R e g u l a t i o n ( E A R ) s e c t i o n s E M T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A L # I e l o p m e n t a n d S o c i a l I n n o v a t i o n ( M i n i s t r y ) o u n d t h e A p p e l l a n t i n e l i g i b l e f o r h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e . r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e u n d e r s e c t i o n 4 7 . 2 ( 1 ) o f t h e c u t i v e m o n t h s i n 2 0 1 4 a n d t h a t t h e r e a r e n o p r o v i s i o n s e r h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e . 4 , 3 9 , 4 7 . 2
I APPEAL# PART E -Summarv of Facts Information before the Ministry at reconsideration included: A copy of a Medical Report -Employability dated June 5, 2014, which states that the Appellant's spouse has anxiety and depression, Hepatitis C and alcohol addiction, with restrictions in concentration, reliability for work [illegible], fatigue, insomnia, variable mood lability[sic] stomach pain, nausea, heartburn, vomiting, antisocial behavior and memory lapses. A copy of a B.C. Employment and Assistance cheque dated March 3, 2014, in the amount of $1,101.06, payable to the Appellant. A copy of a B.C. Employment and Assistance cheque dated March 3, 2014, in the amount of $828.88, payable to the Appellant. A letter to the Ministry from the Appellant dated June 6, 2014. A copy of a disconnection notice from B.C. Hydro, dated May 6, 2014. A note from the Appellant's landlord, dated May 26, 2014, stating that she is in arrears in her rent. A copy of a letter from the Ministry to the Appellant dated March 10, 2014, advising her of their decision to deny a request for health supplement. A copy of the Appellant's spouse's Application for Income Assistance, page 3 of 5, dated May 3, 2014, with "Drug or alcohol problem" circled in the section "If not looking for work, why not?" A copy of an Employment Program of British Columbia Action Plan in the Appellant's spouse's name, dated March 17, 2014, listing under "considerations", financial hardship, no driver's licence, criminal record, age (older worker), addiction issues (alcohol), employment maintenance issues, no computer skills, lack of skills/qualifications, low-skilled (skills-gaps). A copy of a Health Supplement Info Sheet 11 -Diet Supplement, dated March 10, 2014 in the Appellant's spouse's name, requesting high protein for treatment of Hepatitis C. A copy of the Appellant's Medical Report -Employability, dated May 15, 2014, listing medical conditions of pregnancy, chronic fatigue, nausea/vomiting, nosebleeds and thrombocytopenia, with restrictions listed as back pain, nausea, nosebleeds occur spontaneously, chronic fatigue from standing too long or exertion, nausea with smells and sight of various items leads to vomiting. A copy of a note on a physician's prescription pad, undated, stating "off work, pregnancy, nausea, fatigue [illegible). A copy of the Appellant's Application for Income Assistance dated March 3, 2014, stating that she has been actively looking for work but cannot find a suitable job, her spouse has a serious alcohol addiction and her landlord wants to evict them if they cannot pay the rent. "No" is entered in the space next to the question "Do you have an immediate need for urgent medical attention?" A copy of a letter to the Ministry from the Appellant's landlord, dated February 10, 2014, stating that the Appellant owes half of the rent for January and all of February. A copy of the Ministry's "SSA Store Assessment Details" printout dated February 3, 2014. The Appellant's Request for Reconsideration, dated May 28, 2014, with attachments. Prior to the hearing the Appellant submitted the following: 1. A copy of a 1 O Day Notice to End Tenancy for Unpaid Rent or Utilities, dated July 6, 2014. 2. A Deposit Account History Financial Enquiry for the dates April 1 to 3, 2014. 3. A copy of an obstetrical ultrasound (14 weeks+), dated May 23, 2014. 4. A copy of a laboratory report dated June 4, 2014, with hematology and lipids test results. 5. A copy of a police certificate of blood alcohol breath test results of the Appellant's spouse, dated May 14, 2013, with a result of 240 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood. 6. A copy of a letter to the Ministry from an addictions counsellor, dated June 26, 2014. 7. A copy of a note written on a physician's prescription pad, dated June 26, 2014, stating that the Aooellant has multiole health issues and her babv is due on October 12, 2014, and that she was EAAT 003(10/06/01)
advise d to refra i n fro m lif t i ng, twi st i ng, be n d i ng , 8 . A c opy o f Part 1 o f the Canadi an B ill of Rights . 9 . A co py of p art of the Canad ian Ch a rter of Rights 10. A co py of the Un ited Nations Conven t i on on th e 11 . A co py of n e w sp ape r art i cles, undat e d. 12 . A co py of a web s ite dealing w ith "C i v i l right s and ci 13. A co py of part o f a Minist ry brochu r e d e aling with three mo nt h l imit , wh o doe s n o t h av e to do the three week w imm ediate need s assessm ent. 1 4. A co py of an art ic le tit l ed "Hu man R ights in Bri t i 1 5 . A co py of a webpag e of the B.C . H uman Rights Coalitio 1 6. A cop y of a note writ ten on a physicia n's prescri A ppel lan t 's spous e, st atin g " o f f work due to [illegible] add a nd add ictions. The Pa n e l determi ned th a t items num b ere d 1 to 7 a nd they wer e i n s upport o f the re cor d s befo re the minister nu mber ed 8 t o 15 a b ov e were arg ument, not ev id e n c e. documents. At th e hearin g t he Appella n t s t ated that s he wants to re di d n o t rea ppl y for i nc o me a ss is t a n ce after being d eni e rec eive bac k p ay. Th e P a n el n o ted t hat th e issue under ap A p pella n t stat ed that s h e was i n receipt of hards h i p ass T h e Ap pella nt stated t hat she i s in nee d becau se her landl and her sp o use sh o ul d not hav e ha d to do a three week be cau se they are exe mpt fro m th is requiremen t due t o them f rom comple t ing a sear ch. She re f e rr ed to t he consi preg n ancy and pro b l em s obtaining day car e for he r children. c omp leted her Medic al Repor t Employ abili t y t o gether form; she wr ote som e of the e nt r ies, and her phys ici an should have ca ll e d h er doctor if the y ha d d oub ts. The App as sist a nc e , a l tho ugh s h e a p plied i n Fe br ua r y. With respe ct to th e three month limit on hardship assistance, the Appellant stated that not all of the relev information was taken into co nsideration by the Ministry. complete job searches because of physical or mental condit the initial determination of ineligibilit y for income assis tance In response to questions from the Panel, the Appellant stated that she applied for hardship assistance on Fe b r uary 3, but did not receive a cheque until March 3 . nose bl e eds at th e time she applied, and that she informed the Ministry that she was The Ministry submitted two documents tit le d "Reasonable Work Search A App e l lan t and h er spouse February 28, 20 14. The Pa nel under s. 22(4 ) of t h e EAA as they were in support o f th e Appellant did not o bj e ct t o their admissi on. The Ministrv resoonded that the Annellant annlied for hardshio assistance on Februarv 3 and was assessed EAA T003(1 0/06/01) I APPEAL# prolo nged s itt i ng [ill eg ible ]. and Fr ee d o ms , wit h excerpts fr om a webs ite. Rights o f t he Chi ld. v il duties". the requi rement t o do a three week work search, o rk search and how to a pply for an sh Columbi a". n titled " F AQ Drug and Alc o h o l Add ictions". p t ion pad , da ted [il legible] 16 , --13, referr ing to the ic t i on, he pa t i t i s, going to see m ental h e alth 16 above were a d m i ssib le u nder s. 2 2(4) o f the EAA a s at recons id eration. The Panl'll d et ermi ned th at item s The Mini str y had n o o b j ect i on to t he admission of th e c e ive "r egular'' i nc ome assis t a nc e . S he stated tha t she d fur t he r hards h ip as si stance beca use sh e wis h es to pea l is t he den ial of hard ship as si sta n ce. The is ta n ce beca us e s h e wa s denied income ass ist a nc e . o rd has threa tened evic t ion. She stat ed th a t she jo b se arch w h en t hey ap plied f or income assistanc e having a ph ys ical o r me n tal c ondit io n th at pre c lu des der ations li sted o n h er s p o use' s Action Plan and he r T he Appellant stated t ha t she and he r p hysician , whi ch exp lain s why the handwriting i s diff erent on th e signed the fo rm. The A p pellan t argued tha t th e M inis t ry ellant stated that it too k u ntil March to rec eive ant She stat ed that she and her spouse were unabl e t o ions that preclu de them f ro m d oin g so; ther ef o re was wrong. She s tated t hat she h ad insomnia, n ausea and p r egnan t. ctiv iti e s Gui d elin es" signed by the dete rmin e d that these documents were admissible records be f o r e the minister at reconsid eration. The
for i mmed iat e n e ed by t elephone F e bru ary 9, th en aft er on Februar y 17 . The che q ue tha t was i s sued i ncluded Appel lant an d her sp o us e sig n e d e m ployment pl ans and were The Ministry stated th at a n yon e appl ying for i n come as stated that on Ap ri l 2 , 2014 , the Mi n i stry foun d th e work s po us e and found it inadequat e and in str u ctions wer e giv pr ope rly cond u ct a work s e arch. Th e Mini stry sta ted that th w or k sea rch to the best of h i s abi l i ty, an d he was scheduled for workshops, 5, the Mi nist ry review e d th e work searches and f ou nd them In re spo nse to qu estion s fro m the Ap pellant , the Mini s t r demo n s trate that both the App e llant an d her s pouse signed work s Minis try sta ted th at due to the imme diate nee d, har dsh i ref used to si gn the work s earch do c uments, t h e y woul d there is no re cord of th e Appe ll a nt's s pouse ever attending a wor ap pli c a nt f o r assis tan ce to provide do cu m ent ati on. The Ap report , the n her spous e wa s r eferr ed to a n ap pro pri ate requiremen ts can be modified; the Appella nt 's spou s e was ab ilit y. I n re s po ns e t o q ues tions f rom th e Pan el, the Mini s t ry st Appellant applied o n line, t hen there was an as sess ment EAA T003(10/06/01) APP E A L# I rece ipt of documen t ation, s h e w as found to be eli gi b le the February benefi t. The Mi n i str y stat ed that t h e given work s ea rch docu m en ts F ebrua r y 2 8 . si sta n ce has a w ork s ea rch re quire ment. T h e M inistr y s earch that w a s submitt ed b y the App ellant a n d her en to th e App ellant and her spouse on ho w to e App ella n t 's sp ouse w a s i nstructe d t o complete a whi ch he d id not a tte nd. O n May una c ce pta ble. y s tat ed th a t th e docume nts s ubmit ted a t th e heari n g ea rch activity guid el ine s documen t s. The p assistanc e w a s given t o the A ppe llant , bu t i f th ey had have b ee n denie d a ssis tance. The Mi n i st ry s t at ed that kshop . The Mi n ist ry s t at ed that it is up to th e pel l a n t was requ es ted t o provide an emp l o yabi lity cont ractor . The M inist ry stated th at work search i nstru ct ed to do the work search to the b e st o f his ated tha t the re i s a mul ti-sta ge a ppl icat ion proc ess; th e f o r immed iat e n eed.
I APP EA L # PART F -Reas ons for Pa n el D e ci s io n The is sue i n thi s appeal is the reaso nableness of t h e Mi n ist ry ' s R econs ider ati o n De cisi on dated June 17 , 2 01 4, wh i ch found the A p pell a nt i n eligible for ha rdship assist a n ce. The Mi nist ry d eterm i n ed t ha t the Ap pellant receiv ed har d s hip a s si stanc e un der s ection 47.2(1) o f the Employment and Assis ta nce Regulation for three consecut i v e mon th s i n 20 14 and that the re are no provis ion s in the le g i sl a tion that would per mit th e i s sua n ce of furt her ha rdship a ss i stanc e. Le gislation EAA Interp reta tion 1 ( 1) In this Ac t : "hard shi p a s sis t anc e" mean s an am o unt for sh elt er and su pp o r t p rov ided under s ection 5 (1) [h ar ds hip a ssis t a nce]; Hard s hi p a ss ista n c e 5 (1 ) Su bject to t he reg ulatio ns, t he mi n i ster may pro vide har d s hip a ssistance to or fo r a fa mily unit that (a ) is el igi b l e for it , and (b) is not e l i g i ble for incom e assis tance. (2) If hardshi p assi stance is re pa yable , befor e pro viding it the mini s t e r ma y specify an d r equire a particular t ype of s ecurity for r ep ayme n t . EA R Applica t ion for income a ssistance -st a ge 1 4.1 (1 ) Th e f i r st stage o f t he p r ocess for assessing the e l i g i bilit y of a family unit for income assistance is f ulfilling t he requiremen ts of su bsecti on (2). (2) The applica nt s for i n com e a ssistance in a family unit (a) must complete and sub m i t t o the mini st er a n ap pli c ation for income assistance (p a rt 1) form an d must include as part of the ap plicatio n (i) the social insurance number of each applicant in the family unit who is a person described in section 7 (2), and (ii) t he i nfor m ation, autho rizations, d eclara ti on s a nd v e rifications spec if ie d by the m inister, as re quired in the application for income assistance (part 1) form, and (b) subject to sub sections (4) a nd (6 ) , mus t (i) complete searches for employment as directed by the minister for the applicable period under subsection (2.1) immediately following the date of the application under paragraph (a), or /iil demonstrate that each of the annlicants has comoleted asearch for emolovment EAAT 003(10/06/01)
APPEAL# I satisfactory to the minister within the 30 day period prior to the date of the application under paragraph (a), and in either case provide information about and verification of the searches for employment, in the form specified by the minister. (2.1) The applicable period for the purposes of subsection (2) (b} (i) is (a) 3 weeks, if any applicant in the family unit is a former recipient, and (b) 5 weeks in any other case. (3) Subsection (2) does not affect the minister's powers under section 10 of the Act. (4) Subsection (2) (b} does not apply to a person who (a) is prohibited by law from working in Canada, (b) has reached 65 years of age, (c) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 48/2010, Sch. 1, s. 1 (b}.] (d) has a physical or mental condition that, in the minister's opinion, precludes the person from completing a search for employment as directed by the minister, or (e) is fleeing an abusive spouse or relative. (f) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 6/2008, s. 1.] (5) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 197/2012, Sch. 1, s. 3 (e).] (6) Subsection (2) (b} does not apply to a sole applicant who (a) has a dependent child, or (b) provides care to a foster child or a child in their care under an agreement referred to in section 8 or 93 (1 ) (g) (ii) of the Child, Family and Community Service Act if the child has not reached 3 years of age. Hardship assistance -eligibility and limitations 39 (1) For a family unit to be eligible for hardship assistance, the family unit (a} must be ineligible for income assistance for one or more reasons set out in sections 41 to 47.2, and (b} must not be ineligible for income assistance for any other reason. (2) A family unit that is eligible for hardship assistance must be provided with hardship assistance ( a ) in accordance with Schedule D, (b) only for the calendar month that includes the date of the applicant's submission of the application for income assistance (part 2) form, and (c) only from the date in that calendar month on which the minister determines that the family unit is eligible for hardship assistance, subject to (i) section 4 (2) of Schedule D for hardship assistance provided under sections 41 to 47.1, and EAAT003(10/06/01)
APPEAL# I (ii) section 4 (3) of Schedule D for hardship assistance provided under section 47.2. (3) A family unit to which hardship assistance has been provided for 3 consecutive calendar months because of the circumstances described in (a ) section 41, 44 or 46, or (b) section 43, unless the source is employment insurance, is not eligible for hardship assistance under any of those sections for the 3 consecutive calendar months immediately following those 3 consecutive calendar months of receipt. (4) If (a) hardship assistance has been provided to a family unit under section 47.2 for the calendar month referred to in subsection (2) (c) of this section, (b} the family unit continues to be 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, and (c) the member of the family unit who has not satisfied that requirement is, if applicable, taking the steps to satisfy the requirement as directed by the minister, hardship assistance may be provided under section 47.2 for a further 2 consecutive calendar months following the initial calendar month for which the hardship assistance is provided. 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 applicant may submit an application for income assistance (part 2) form under 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's position is that she is still in immediate need of hardship assistance, and she and her spouse should not have been deemed to have failed to comply with work search requirements as they should have been exempted from those requirements due to physical and mental conditions that preclude them from completing a search for employment. The Appellant argued that there is a significant imbalance of power between the Appellant and the Ministry, and that she did what she could to bring her difficulties to the Ministry's attention as to why she and her spouse could not comolv with the work search reauirement. She EAAT003(10/06/01)
ar gued that the physician's not es show that she and her spouse were not capable of look she did her bes t. She ar gued that they si gned empl oy men human rights are being ig nored. The Ministry ' s p ositio n i s t h a t t h e A ppell a nt a nd her spouse agreements to d o so, a nd di d not complete the m sa ti sfact Appellant has r e ceived the maxi mum numbe r of co nsecutive applicable legi slation, and there is no pro vision in the legislation to pe assistance at this time. The Minist ry argued that the Ap p a rt ic ip a t e to t he b est of his abi lities , and he was referred him deal w ith his bar rie rs t o e mployment, however h e did not atten The Pa nel n otes section 19.1 of t h e E AA an d sections 44 and 46.3 of the Administrative Tribunals Act provide t h a t t h e P an el h as no juris dict i on o v e r hu m an r ig h t s legis Freedoms issues. The Panel finds that the Appe llan t was i nitially d enied income assistance under s. 4.1 ( meeting wor k s e ar ch r e q u irements, t h en was granted h EAR pr ovide s for hardship assis t an ce f or t hose who a r e the fami ly unit has n ot satisfied the req ui rem ent under s. 4. e mployme nt. Section 39( 4), EAR states that a fam ily un under s. 47.2 f o r a ca len da r mont h and cont i nues to be s atisfied the requirement re spe ct ing the compl e ti on of se satisfy the requirement as d irected by the m inis t e r , may conse c u ti v e months f ol lowing the initial calendar month 39 (4 ) doe s no t provid e for hardship a s si s ta nce to a fami followi ng th e i nit ial cal e n d ar mont h o f hardsh i p assistance in not sat i s fie d the work search requ ir e ments of s ectio n 4. A p pe ll ant and her spo use were f ou n d to have not satis f denial of inc o m e ass istance to the A p pe l lant by the Mi n T he P anel there fore c o n firms t he Ministry's d ecisi o n a s r EAA T003(10/06/01) I AP PEAL# ing f or wor k, alth ough t plan s b ecause they needed money, an d her basic were required to com plete work searches, signe d o rily. In addition, the Mini stry holds that the mo nths of hardshi p assi stance pro v ided for in the r mit issuance of further h a r d ship pell a nt's sp ouse's emplo y me nt plan required him to to a n employment contractor who wo uld have help ed d a ny work s h op s. lation or t h e Canadian Cha rte r of Ri ghts and 2 )(b), EAR, fo r n ot ar d s h ip as sis tance unde r s. 39(2), E AR. Se c t i o n 47( 2 ), ineligibl e fo r inc o m e a ss i stanc e beca u se a m ember of 1 ( 2 ) res pecting th e co mple t i on of s ea r ches for it to whic h hardship as sist ance ha s bee n pro v ide d ineli gible beca u se a mem ber of the fam ily unit ha s not arch e s f or employment an d i s ta k i ng the steps to b e prov i d ed ha rdship assistan ce for a further 2 fo r whic h the hardshi p ass i s tance is provid ed. Se c tion ly unit bey ond the furth er 2 c o nsecutive months sit uati o n s whe r e a me m be r of th e f am ily unit has 1 (2) of the EA R, a s is t h e case her e, where b o t h the ie d w o rk s earc h requireme n ts . The Panel notes that the i stry is not an issu e und er a ppeal in this heari n g ea son a b l y su pport ed b y the evidence .
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.