DIGEST OF ADJUDICATION PRECEDENTS AA
AA-21 (06/11)
ISSUE/DIGEST CODE Able and Available/AA 350.05
DOCKET/DATE ABR-85-6293/2-25-86
AUTHORITY Section 500C of the Act
TITLE Period of Ineligibility
SUBTITLE Day-to-Day as opposed to Week
CROSS-REFERENCE AA 235.05, Health or Physical Condition
The period under review was April 21 through April 27. The claimant testified that she was ill with influenza on Monday, April 22
and Tuesday, April 23 and was unable to seek or accept work on those days. However, she had recuperated sufficiently to make
employer contacts and hold herself ready for work for the remainder of the week.
HELD: Section 500C provides that if an otherwise eligible individual is unable to work or is unavailable for work on any normal
workday of the week, she shall remain eligible to receive benefits with respect to such week, but reduced by 1/5 of the weekly
benefit amount for each day of such inability or unavailability.
The claimant was eligible to receive benefits for the week April 21 through 27, reduced by 2/5 of her weekly benefit amount.
ISSUE/DIGEST CODE Able and Available/AA 350.05
DOCKET/DATE Quincy School District #172, 471 N.E. 2d 1056 (1984)
AUTHORITY Section 500C-2 of the Act
TITLE Period of Ineligibility
SUBTITLE Holidays
CROSS-REFERENCE MS 95.05, Construction of Statutes
The employer School District went into recess at the close of the school day on December 18, 1981, and reopened on January 4,
1982. During that period, the claimant, a School District Bus Driver, did not work and was not paid wages. She applied for
unemployment benefits for the period December 27, 1981 through January 2, 1982.
The School District contended that the claimant had been unavailable for work, pursuant to Section 500C-2 of the Act:
An individual shall be considered to be unavailable for work on days listed as whole holidays...and on days
which are holidays according to the custom of his trade or occupation, if his failure to work on such day is a
result of the holiday.
The Board of Review construed the "holidays" provision of Section 500C-2 to apply only to individual holidays, but not to any
period of unemployment which preceded or followed such holidays. It was noted that the reference to "holidays within a trade or
occupation" was intended to provide for single, non-legal holidays, such as April 1 for the United Mine Workers or May 1 as
celebrated by the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union.
The Board of Review stated:
(I)t is evident that the claimant's failure to work during the period under review was a result of the (employer's)
shutdown for a vacation period, and not because of the (Christmas) holiday, rendering Section 500C-2
inapplicable...(T)he claimant was subject to a short-term layoff of a definite duration during which she was
available to accept suitable employment at any time...(T)he eligibility requirements of Section 500C-2 of the
Act have thus been met.
HELD: The court concluded:
There is perhaps no more widely recognized holiday period than that of the Christmas recess period as observed
in Illinois schools, although the precise dates of the recess may vary from year to year and between districts. We
therefore conclude that this period falls within the meaning of Section 500C-2 of the Act, as holidays according
to the custom of the trade or occupation...clearly distinguishable from a shutdown for inventory or vacation
purposes...
