# <up to> <which cannot exceed> the maximum weekly insurable amount.

< Previous | Next >

#### Roundhouse

##### Senior Member
They basically say the same thing, difference is the end clause. I am having trouble parsing the end part of Option 2. Which of the two would a native English user prefer?

• The weekly benefit rate payable to workers is 55 percent of their average weekly insurable earnings, which cannot exceed the maximum weekly insurable amount.

• The weekly benefit rate payable to workers is 55 percent of their average weekly insurable earnings, up to the maximum weekly insurable amount.

• #### dojibear

##### Senior Member
Both sentences are ambiguous (confusing). Which does it mean?

The max payable rate is:
(A) 55% of the max weekly insurable amount
(B) the max weekly insurable amount

In other words, does the "up to" limit phrase apply to
(C) "the weekly benefit rate payable"
or
(D) "their average weekly insurable earnings"?

#### Roundhouse

##### Senior Member
Both sentences are ambiguous (confusing). Which does it mean?

The max payable rate is:
(A) 55% of the max weekly insurable amount
(B) the max weekly insurable amount

In other words, does the "up to" limit phrase apply to
(C) "the weekly benefit rate payable"
or
(D) "their average weekly insurable earnings"?
So the maximum weekly insurable amount is say \$1000.

Now if my average weekly insurable earnings is \$500, then I will receive 55%x\$500 in benefits.

But if my average weekly insurable earnings is \$1200, then I will receive 55%x\$1000 in benefits (meaning that the maximum amount of earnings that the program will insure me on is \$1000, any amount above that is not insured)

The average weekly earnings of any worker that is to be insured cannot exceed the maximum weekly insurable earnings amount.

#### Uncle Jack

##### Senior Member
I would say that the first sentence is wrong, since "which" appears to refer to "their average weekly insurable earnings", which is not what what you mean.

I have no problem with the second sentence, as I see "up to" as following on from "is", and it is a common way of expressing this sort if thing in BrE.

#### Roundhouse

##### Senior Member
I would say that the first sentence is wrong, since "which" appears to refer to "their average weekly insurable earnings", which is not what what you mean.

I have no problem with the second sentence, as I see "up to" as following on from "is", and it is a common way of expressing this sort if thing in BrE.
Uncle Jack, thanks very much for pointing out that mistake.

Do you think this is better in comparison to the right option 2.

• The weekly benefit rate payable to workers is 55 percent of their average weekly insurable earnings. Weekly earnings are insured up to a maximum weekly amount.

#### Uncle Jack

##### Senior Member
Do you think this is better in comparison to the right option 2.

• The weekly benefit rate payable to workers is 55 percent of their average weekly insurable earnings. Weekly earnings are insured up to a maximum weekly amount.
No. This does not make it clear that there is a cap on the benefit paid. Incidentally, I now see that it should be benefit, not benefit rate. You can say that the benefit rate is 55%, but if you want to add "payable to workers", then it is the benefit you are talking about, not the benefit rate.

I also might be mistaken in my post #4. There is a cap on the "their average weekly insurable earnings", but I still would recommend the first sentence since this looks like there is a cap on earnings. What I imagine you want to say is that there is a cap on the benefit.

#### Roundhouse

##### Senior Member
U
No. This does not make it clear that there is a cap on the benefit paid. Incidentally, I now see that it should be benefit, not benefit rate. You can say that the benefit rate is 55%, but if you want to add "payable to workers", then it is the benefit you are talking about, not the benefit rate.

I also might be mistaken in my post #4. There is a cap on the "their average weekly insurable earnings", but I still would recommend the first sentence since this looks like there is a cap on earnings. What I imagine you want to say is that there is a cap on the benefit.
Uncle jack, the wordings are actually very confusing. But this is the best way I can explain. Can you kindly take a look one more time

• The weekly EI benefit payable to workers is 55 percent of their average weekly insurable earnings, up to a maximum amount. Starting January 1, 2019, the maximum yearly insurable earnings amount is \$53,100; this equates to a maximum weekly insurable amount of \$1,021 [53,000/52]. The maximum weekly benefit that a worker can receive is therefore \$562 [1,021 x 55%].

#### Uncle Jack

##### Senior Member
All of that is fine. If you don't need to include the \$53,100 figure and the various calculations, you could end the first sentence with something like "a maximum of \$562" or "a maximum amount, which in 2019 is \$562".

< Previous | Next >