Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Retraining costs

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    EI pointed me to an organization called VPI that provides funding for retraining in Oakville.
    Not only that they rejected my application (as well as many others) due to lack of funding. They also closed the VPI office and EI has no other such service available.

    My retraining is very specific and is only provided by a German Software corporation that is not a university or a recognized educational institution. This make funding a bit harder to come by than other retraining programs.

    Comment


    • #32
      Then why wouldn't you look at other retraining programs and take what was available rather than seeking something next to impossible to find?

      I know how frustrating the second career program can be, the frustration of going through it with a friend nearly caused us not to be friends anymore however it turned out that a major part of the problem was all the roadblocks HE was putting up in front of himself. There were a lot of rejections and 'no's to get through and eventually he began finding every excuse not to bother trying anymore. Thankfully he was persistent and kept trying EVERY resource available and was able to find an amazing training program (in your area even) and it was well worth the trouble to get into.

      Keep an open mind and say YES to every opportunity that comes up and doors will open for you.

      Comment


      • #33
        Ok Blinkandimgone... I have a feeling that what you just described is going to be my ex's argument in court.

        Her last correspondence noted that she wants Sole Custody and to keep my visits limited to 3 hours 2 times a week, and pay child support and half of daycare and other expenses.

        Seeing that you are coming from the other side of this argument... What do you think I should do ? Maybe you can give me an insight into how my ex thinks...

        Maybe you can convince me of what my ex is trying to tell me all this time.
        Maybe I am just a sperm donor with an obligation to make a monthly payment and have little involvement in my daughter's life.

        Comment


        • #34
          I'm not coming from the 'other side' of your arguement, especially when it comes to the custody/access.

          Simply put, if she is supporting herself and the child and asking for minimal support from you then why are you trying to force her into earning a higher income, I don't understand how that makes HER a dead beat in any way.

          Your beef seems to be that you want spousal support except she is now no longer in a position to pay that, however she is fully supporting herself and the child. Did your career advancement suffer in any way due to your marriage? Did you give up a career or any potential advancement to stay home and raise the children? You don't seem to have been disadvantaged at all because of the marriage so why should she be forced to pay you spousal support based on the higher income she no longer earns??

          Your story is changing again, you said in a previous post that you have close to 60/40 split access, now you're saying you get 6 hours a week. Which is it now?

          Comment


          • #35
            My story never changed... I have 6 hours / wk today.

            But I'm planning to ask the court to allow me to take care of the child while ex is working - it was suggested that this is close to 40/60 in one of the postings.

            I was disadvantaged by the separation.
            I'm not able to afford the lifestyle that we had prior.

            Had she not left, she would have supported us with her $75,000 a year job that would have maintained our lifestyle until I got back to my previous earning potential.

            Listen... Imagine I'm the woman and she is the man in this case...

            I'm a mother whose husband left her and took away her kid. I'm struggling to survive, being denied proper access to my kid, and trying to find ways to improve my odds of getting a decent job and fighting to bring my kid back into my life at the same time.

            When I told this story to different people, first thing that came out of their mouths... Poor woman and what an ******** husband...

            Like it or not, there is a palpable bias in your opinions. Evident in the way you're trying to discredit the facts of my story - hinting to possible lies that I have never told.

            Either way, bias is everywhere, and if I learned anything from this dialogue is that I should be prepared for it.
            Last edited by logicalvelocity; 07-13-2010, 11:44 PM. Reason: Do I need a reason? You tell me

            Comment


            • #36
              You want truly objective? Use 'Parent A' and 'Parent B' and see what the opinions are.

              Aside from that, of course you suffered from the seperation, everyone does, you now are and have half of what you were and did. The goal is to make sure the children don't suffer.

              The question was were you financially disadvantaged because of the marriage. Did you give up your career to stay home with the kids while your spouse advanced their career? Did you contribute to her career? Are you or do you have the ability to be self sufficient?

              You were married 10 years and had a baby just over a year ago, you don't say what your income was in comparison to hers prior to becoming unemployed. She clearly worked to advance her career prior to having children, did you? What was decided on who would stay home with the baby when it arrived?


              Here's look at some of the things taken into consideration when deciding on spousal support (#3 in particular is what I'm getting at) :
              1. Length of marriage: the longer the marriage, the greater the likelihood is that an application for spousal support will be successful.
              2. Relative difference in income: the greater the difference in income between the parties is at the end of a marriage, the greater the likelihood that an order will follow, awarding spousal support.
              3. Economic disadvantage: The more one spouse has lost as result of the marriage, such as job skills, job opportunities or employability, the greater the likelihood of an order for spousal support. Likewise, the more one party's earning capacity is reduced because of family obligations (ie. the obligation to rear the children while the spouse works outside the home), the greater the likelihood of an order for spousal support.
              I'm speaking strictly on the spousal support issue. If I didn't already post in any of your other threads, read some of the other similar posts and you'll see my opinions about the custody/access issues.
              Last edited by blinkandimgone; 07-13-2010, 11:44 PM. Reason: the voices told me to...

              Comment


              • #37
                Hmmm breastfeeding. Coincidence, Similar situation... Imagine that.

                CanLII - 2008 CanLII 68184 (ON S.C.)

                Comment


                • #38
                  This part was particularly interesting:

                  [22] It is the wife’s position that both child and spousal support should be based on his 2007 income of $96,542 and her E.I. income of $18,288. That is to say, based on the highest he has made in four years and the lowest that she has made in four years. To my mind, that is an unreasonable position.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                    This part was particularly interesting:
                    lol...yeah...and a link to a Toronto Law Firm...too.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Blink, you're really going out on a limb there. In that case, the judge agreed that the father's income had lessened due to general changes in the economy and would have been the same no matter where he worked. This clearly does not apply to the OP. They have as much in common as apples and orangutangs.

                      Underdog's ex had secure, stable employment that she could and should have returned to after her mat leave.

                      If her reason is stress, right now, due to the separation and the baby, sure. But she isn't saying that, she isn't planning on returning to her job, she isn't intending to work to her full earning potential. If she has stress, anxiety, whatever emotional and medical issues, then say so and get a doctor's note, and indicate a timeline when she can be back on her feet.

                      Take the child out of her household, and say Underdog has full custody. She is still under just as much stress. Should she be allowed to quit her job and not support her child? I'm sorry, I really don't understand your reasoning here. I'm sure you have reasons, but none of what you are suggesting is supported by legislation or by court decisions.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I missed that, lol. I also find it interesting that he imputed an income to BOTH parents before deciding.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Blink - I also can not find backing to your argument in all the case law and other commentary that I read so far, about a parent intentionally underemployed being given the thumbs up from the judge for doing a great job in supporting him/herself and the child.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            If anything at this point it sounds like she has been economically disadvantaged, giving up her career to be more available to take care of her family. In any case, you still don't say what the difference in income was prior to her going on maternity leave and you being unemployed...?

                            Essentially you have said she extended her maternity leave by choosing not go back right away, she has a year to decide if she will, thats not the same as her quitting her job at all.

                            Like NBDad, said earlier...

                            Originally posted by NBDad View Post

                            You are currently getting EI benefits, but if you look at your last 3 years income taxes...what's the average? She can argue that YOU be inputted that income just as easily as YOU can get her inputted @ 75K. (She's going to argue if YOU can use your EI, then SHE can use HER Mat leave income)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I have plenty of evidence that I'm not in any way shape or form able to gain employment with previous salary. And there is her admission that she quit her job and currently working for peanuts. All in writing.

                              Imputing my previous income or an average of incomes just doesn't make any sense.

                              Worst case scenario, the judge will ignore previous incomes and calculate support based on my EI and her peanuts...

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Lol, Okay. Could you let us know how you make out. When's your hearing?

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X