(2001), 53 O.R. (3d) 321,  O.J. No. 1129 (C.A.), at para. 8.
Thus, the fact that Ms. Brake did not apply for other restaurant
management positions does not mean that she did not make
reasonable efforts to mitigate.
2. No deductions from income during the notice period
 I turn now to the appellant’s second argument in respect
of mitigation, namely, that the trial judge erred because he
failed to reduce the damages award by the amounts that
Ms. Brake received during the notice period.
 An employee who is dismissed without reasonable notice
is entitled to damages for breach of contract based on the
employment income the employee would have earned during the
reasonable notice period, less any amounts received in mitigation of loss during the notice period: Sylvester v. British Columbia,  2 S.C.R. 315,  S.C.J. No. 58, at paras. 14-17.
 While this general statement of principle governs, I would
not reduce the damages award by the amounts that Ms. Brake
received during the notice period because, in my view, they are
not “amounts received in mitigation of loss”.
 The trial judge did not directly address the question of
whether to deduct employment income received during the
notice period from the damages award. It may be, as the
respondent contends, that his reasons can be inferred from the
last few sentences of para. 24, where the trial judge said:
I find that [Ms. Brake’s] subsequent employment represents a reasonable
effort on her part to mitigate her losses. However, I also find that her abil-
ity to find employment does not take away from the loss she suffered from
being dismissed without cause. The cashier position she occupies now at
Home Depot is so substantially inferior to the managerial position she
held with the [appellant] that the former does not diminish the loss of
 To the extent that the trial judge was suggesting that the
court did not need to consider whether income received from a
job that was inferior to the one from which the employee was
dismissed was mitigation income, I respectfully disagree. That
approach does not accord with the principle that employment
income earned during the notice period is generally to be treated
as mitigation of loss.
 Having said that, in my view, the income earned by
Ms. Brake during the notice period need not be deducted from
the damages award. To explain why, I will consider
(a) the employment income (“EI”) benefits that Ms. Brake