656.039
Election of coverage for workers not subject to law; procedure; cancellation;
election of coverage for home care workers and personal support workers. (1) An employer of one or more
persons defined as nonsubject workers or not defined as subject workers may
elect to make them subject workers. If the employer is or becomes a
carrier-insured employer, the election shall be made by filing written notice thereof
with the insurer with a copy to the Director of the Department of Consumer and
Business Services. The effective date of coverage is governed by ORS 656.419
(3). If the employer is or becomes a self-insured employer, the election shall
be made by filing written notice thereof with the director, the effective date
of coverage to be the date specified in the notice.
(2) Any election
under subsection (1) of this section may be canceled by written notice thereof
to the insurer or, in the case of a self-insured employer, by notice thereof to
the director. The cancellation is effective at 12 midnight ending the day the notice
is received by the insurer or the director, unless a later date is specified in
the notice. The insurer shall, within 10 days after receipt of a notice of
cancellation under this section, send a copy of the notice to the director.
(3) When
necessary the insurer or the director shall fix assumed minimum or maximum
wages for persons made subject workers under this section.
(4)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a person or employer not
subject to this chapter who elects to become covered may apply to an insurer
for coverage. An insurer other than the State Accident Insurance Fund
Corporation may provide such coverage. However, the State Accident Insurance
Fund Corporation shall accept any written notice filed and provide coverage as
provided in this section if all subject workers of the employers will be
insured with the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation and the coverage of
those subject workers is not considered by the State Accident Insurance Fund
Corporation to be a risk properly assignable to the assigned risk pool.
(5)(a) The Home
Care Commission created by ORS 410.602 shall elect coverage on behalf of
persons who employ home care workers or personal support workers to make home
care workers and personal support workers subject workers.
(b) As used in
this subsection:
(A) “Home care
worker” has the meaning given that term in ORS 410.600.
(B) “Personal
support worker” has the meaning given that term in ORS 410.600. [1965 c.285 §11;
1975 c.556 §22; 1979 c.839 §1; 1981 c.854 §6; 1983 c.816 §1; 1985 c.212 §2;
2007 c.241 §8; 2007 c.835 §1; 2010 c.100 §9; 2014 c.116 §12; 2018 c.75 §28]
656.040 [Amended by 1959 c.448 §7;
repealed by 1965 c.285 §95]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1979–2018 · leading case:
SAIF Corp. v. Tono, 336 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
SAIF Corp. v. Tono, 336 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 16× “We note that, in 2014, the legislature amended ORS 656.039 to make privately paid home care workers, as well as state-funded home care workers, eligible for workers’ compensation coverage upon election by the Home Care Commission.”
Schmidt v. Intel Corp., 112 P.3d 428 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “5 ORS 656.039 permits a carrier-insured or self-insured employer “of one or more persons defined as nonsubject workers or not defined as subject workers” to “elect to make them subject workers.”
Erzen v. State Accident Ins. Fund, 596 P.2d 1004 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 3× “SAIF denied the claim on the ground that claimant was a corporate officer and the employer had not elected coverage for its corporate officers under ORS 656.039. The referee and the Board held claimant was entitled to benefits as a covered workman and ordered SAIF to accept the…”
Clevidence v. Portland Sch. Dist. No. 1, 866 P.2d 492 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 3× “Defendant submitted evidence on summary judgment that, at the time of the accident, it had elected pursuant to ORS 656.039 to provide workers’ compensation coverage to students participating in the cafeteria assistance program and had paid workers’ compensation premiums to…”
SAIF Corp. v. Hansen, 870 P.2d 247 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“The law did not require that he be covered by workers’ compensation insurance, and he did not elect coverage under ORS 656.039. In March, 1987, claimant injured his knee on the job, and filed a claim with SAIF.”
Quadel Indus. v. Luckman, 770 P.2d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 8× “ORS 656.039(1). Quadel, as Luckman’s employer, could have elected coverage for him, but, because Quadel is an employer subject to ORS chapter 656, that election would not be pursuant to ORS 656.”
SAIF Corp. v. Cox, 893 P.2d 553 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “027(9), and that he was not covered by an election of coverage under ORS 656.039(1). 1 ORS 656.027(9) provides, in part: “All workers are subject to this chapter except those nonsubject workers described in the following subsections: “ * * * * “(9) Corporate officers who are…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.039(1) — 4 cases
Clevidence v. Portland Sch. Dist. No. 1, 866 P.2d 492 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Defendant submitted evidence on summary judgment that, at the time of the accident, it had elected pursuant to ORS 656.039 to provide workers’ compensation coverage to students participating in the cafeteria assistance program and had paid workers’ compensation premiums to…”
Quadel Indus. v. Luckman, 770 P.2d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“ORS 656.039(1). Quadel, as Luckman’s employer, could have elected coverage for him, but, because Quadel is an employer subject to ORS chapter 656, that election would not be pursuant to ORS 656.”
SAIF Corp. v. Cox, 893 P.2d 553 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“027(9), and that he was not covered by an election of coverage under ORS 656.039(1). 1 ORS 656.027(9) provides, in part: “All workers are subject to this chapter except those nonsubject workers described in the following subsections: “ * * * * “(9) Corporate officers who are…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.039(4) — 1 case
Quadel Indus. v. Luckman, 770 P.2d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“ORS 656.039(1). Quadel, as Luckman’s employer, could have elected coverage for him, but, because Quadel is an employer subject to ORS chapter 656, that election would not be pursuant to ORS 656.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.039(5) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Tono, 336 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“We note that, in 2014, the legislature amended ORS 656.039 to make privately paid home care workers, as well as state-funded home care workers, eligible for workers’ compensation coverage upon election by the Home Care Commission.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.039(5)(a) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Tono, 336 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“We note that, in 2014, the legislature amended ORS 656.039 to make privately paid home care workers, as well as state-funded home care workers, eligible for workers’ compensation coverage upon election by the Home Care Commission.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.