Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.015 (2026)

Employee

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      657.015 Employee. As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise:

      (1) “Employee” means any person, including noncitizens and minors, employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter in an employment subject to this chapter.

      (2) “Employee” does not include a person who volunteers or donates services performed for no remuneration or without expectation or contemplation of remuneration as the adequate consideration for the services performed for a religious or charitable institution or a governmental entity. [Amended by 1999 c.734 §1; 2025 c.43 §6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1973–2016 · leading case: Nkrumah v. City of Portland, 323 P.3d 453 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nkrumah v. City of Portland, 323 P.3d 453 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 8× “Rather he argues, as he did below, that he was not a “volunteer” under a proper interpretation of the term “employee” under ORS 657.015, which provides: “As used in this chapter * * *, ‘employee’ means any person * * *, employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire,…”
Emp. Departmet v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc., 204 P.3d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “In Necanicum, the question was whether the directors of a corporation were “employees” of the corporation for purposes of the unemployment compensation and taxation scheme: “Accordingly, if the directors fall within the definition of‘employee,’ set forth in ORS 657.015, in that…”
Necanicum Inv. Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 190 P.3d 368 (Or. 2008). · cites it 2× “Accordingly, if the directors fall within the definition of “employee,” set forth in ORS 657.015, in that they are employed for remuneration by the corporation, the payments are subject to unemployment tax, “unless the context requires otherwise.”
Newport Church of the Nazarene v. Hensley, 56 P.3d 386 (Or. 2002). “An employee is “any person * * * employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter * * ORS 657.015. Employment is defined as “service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration or under any…”
Church at 295 S. 18th St., St. Helens v. Emp. Dep't, 28 P.3d 1185 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “An “employee” is defined as: “[A]ny person * * * employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter * * *118 ORS 657.015. Finally, “employment” is “service for an employer * * * performed for…”
Mkt. Transp., Ltd. v. Emp. Dep't, 379 P.3d 608 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “ORS 657.015 defines “employee” as any person “employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter in an employment subject to this chapter.”
May Trucking Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 284 P.3d 553 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 5× “ORS 657.015 defines “employee” as any person “employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter in an employment subject to this chapter.”
Emp. Div. v. Surata Soy Foods, Inc., 662 P.2d 810 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× ““Employe,” under the Unemployment Insurance Law, ORS 657.015, means any person employed for “remuneration” under a contract of hire by an employer.”
North Pac. Supply Co. v. Emp. Div., 787 P.2d 495 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “” Only “services” performed for an “employer” for “remuneration” constitute “employment,” and only “remuneration for employment” constitutes wages subject to the unemployment insurance law.”
Peterson v. Emp. Div., 728 P.2d 95 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “” ORS 657.015. For purposes of chapter 657, “employment” is “service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied.”
SAIF Corp. v. Ekdahl, 12 P.3d 57 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). “Although those cases addressed a slightly different issue, namely, whether a cooperative’s payment of patronage dividends to its members constituted “remuneration” under ORS 657.015 and ORS 656.005 respectively, we find our reasoning in those cases to be applicable to this case…”
Shiloh Youth Revival Ctr., Inc. v. Emp. Div., 605 P.2d 704 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “In general, an employer is required to pay tax whenever it falls within the definitional requirements of ORS 657.015 to 657.030, unless its activities are specifically exempt.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.015(1): 3 cases
Necanicum Inv. Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 190 P.3d 368 (Or. 2008). “Accordingly, if the directors fall within the definition of “employee,” set forth in ORS 657.015, in that they are employed for remuneration by the corporation, the payments are subject to unemployment tax, “unless the context requires otherwise.”
Emp. Departmet v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc., 204 P.3d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). “In Necanicum, the question was whether the directors of a corporation were “employees” of the corporation for purposes of the unemployment compensation and taxation scheme: “Accordingly, if the directors fall within the definition of‘employee,’ set forth in ORS 657.015, in that…”
May Trucking Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 284 P.3d 553 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “ORS 657.015 defines “employee” as any person “employed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied, by an employer subject to this chapter in an employment subject to this chapter.”
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.