657.030
Employment generally; educational, hospital, nursing, student service
exclusions. (1) As
used in this chapter, except as provided in ORS 657.035, 657.040 and 657.043 to
657.094, “employment” means service for an employer, including service in
interstate commerce, within or outside the United States, performed for
remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or
implied.
(2)
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, “employment” includes
service that is:
(a) Subject to
the tax imposed by the Federal Unemployment Tax Act; or
(b) Required to
be covered under this chapter as a condition for employers to receive a full
tax credit against the tax imposed by the Federal Unemployment Tax Act.
(3)
Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2) of this section, “employment” does not
include:
(a) Service
performed in the employ of a school, college or university, if the service is
performed by a student who is enrolled and is regularly attending classes at
the school, college or university, or by the spouse of the student, if the
spouse is advised at the time the spouse commences to perform the service, that
the employment of the spouse is provided under a program to provide financial
assistance to the student by the school, college, or university, and the
employment is not covered by any program of unemployment insurance.
(b) Service
performed in the employ of a hospital, if the service is performed by a patient
of the hospital.
(c) Service
performed as a student nurse in the employ of a hospital or a nurses’ training
school by an individual who is enrolled in a nurses’ training school chartered
or approved pursuant to the laws of this state.
(d) Service
performed by an individual who is enrolled at a nonprofit or public educational
institution that normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and
normally has a regularly organized body of students in attendance at the place
where its educational activities are carried on as a student in a full-time
program, taken for credit at the institution, that combines academic
instruction with work experience, if the service is an integral part of the
program, and the program has been approved by the Director of the Employment
Department, and the institution has so certified to the employer, except that
this paragraph does not apply to service performed in a program established for
or on behalf of an employer or group of employers.
(e) Service
performed by a full-time student in the employ of an organized camp described
in section 3306(c)(20) of the Internal Revenue Code:
(A) If the camp:
(i) Did not
operate for more than seven months in the calendar year and did not operate
more than seven months in the preceding calendar year; or
(ii) Had average
gross receipts for any six months in the preceding calendar year that were not
more than 33-1/3 percent of its average gross receipts for the other six months
in the preceding calendar year; and
(B) If the
full-time student performed services in the employ of the camp for less than 13
calendar weeks in the calendar year.
(4) As used in
subsection (3)(e) of this section, an individual shall be treated as a
full-time student for any period:
(a) During which
the individual is enrolled as a full-time student at an educational
institution; or
(b) That is
between academic years or terms if:
(A) The
individual was enrolled as a full-time student at an educational institution
for the immediately preceding academic year or term; and
(B) There is a
reasonable assurance that the individual will be enrolled for the immediately
succeeding academic year or term after the period described in subparagraph (A)
of this paragraph. [Amended by 1959 c.405 §2; 1971 c.463 §5; 1975 c.257 §2;
1981 c.77 §2; 1987 c.263 §1; 2011 c.106 §3]
Notes of Decisions
Emp. Departmet v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc., 204 P.3d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 19× “In 1985, a referee for the Oregon Employment Division issued a decision concluding that franchisees of Lyle Graddon (NMC’s founder and president) and NACOR, doing business as National Maintenance Contractors of Oregon, were “not in a relationship of employer-employee or a status…”
Gross v. Emp. Dep't, 240 P.3d 1130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 17× “025 and that the computer repair technicians affiliated with his business are engaged in “employment” under ORS 657.030 through 657.094. 1 Petitioner argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) misinterpreted the applicable statutes in making those determinations.”
Broadway Cab LLC v. Emp. Dep't, 364 P.3d 338 (Or. 2015).
· cites it 5× “505(2), and “employment” is “service for an employer” that is “performed for remuneration,” ORS 657.030(1). Read together, those statutes require Broadway to pay unemployment insurance taxes on sums paid to drivers for services performed for Broadway for remuneration.”
Necanicum Inv. Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 164 P.3d 1197 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 6× “105 as meaning “all remuneration for employment” 3 (emphasis added), and “employment” is defined in ORS 657.030 as “service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration or under any contract of hire.”
Necanicum Inv. Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 190 P.3d 368 (Or. 2008).
· cites it 3× “]” Finally, “employment” is defined in ORS 657.030, which provides, in part: “As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise, * * * ‘employment’ means service for an employer, including service in interstate commerce, within or outside of the United States,…”
Kirkpatrick v. Peet, 428 P.2d 405 (Or. 1967).
· cites it 2× “The pertinent statutes are as follows: “ORS 657.030. Employment; generally. * * * £[E]mployment’ means service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration or under any contract of hire, written or oral, express or implied.”
Church at 295 S. 18th St., St. Helens v. Emp. Dep't, 28 P.3d 1185 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “In this case, the church observes, the employment statutes include a number of exemptions from the definition of “employment,” including service performed for a school by a student, service performed for a hospital by a patient, and service performed by a student nurse, ORS…”
Taylor v. Emp. Div., 597 P.2d 780 (Or. 1979).
· cites it 3× “’’ 2 (Emphasis supplied.) ORS 657.030 defines "employment” as "service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration * * (Emphasis added.”
Cejas Com. Interiors, Inc. v. Torres-Lizama, 316 P.3d 389 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“005(13) (defining “employer,” for purposes of the workers’ compensation statutes, as “any person * * * who contracts to pay a remuneration for and secures the right to direct and control the services of any person”); ORS 657.030 - 657.094 (defining “employment,” with numerous…”
Salem Coll. & Academy, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 695 P.2d 25 (Or. 1985).
“ORS 657.030(2)(b) expressly so provides. We do not know whether the Secretary of Labor will persist in his interpretation of the exemptions from FUTA involved here until the United States Supreme Court resolves the constitutional questions.”
Emp. Div. v. Ring, 803 P.2d 766 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 5× “See ORS 657.030 to ORS 657.094 (“employment”); ORS 657.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.030(1) — 22 cases
Broadway Cab LLC v. Emp. Dep't, 364 P.3d 338 (Or. 2015).
“505(2), and “employment” is “service for an employer” that is “performed for remuneration,” ORS 657.030(1). Read together, those statutes require Broadway to pay unemployment insurance taxes on sums paid to drivers for services performed for Broadway for remuneration.”
Gross v. Emp. Dep't, 240 P.3d 1130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“025 and that the computer repair technicians affiliated with his business are engaged in “employment” under ORS 657.030 through 657.094. 1 Petitioner argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) misinterpreted the applicable statutes in making those determinations.”
Emp. Departmet v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc., 204 P.3d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“In 1985, a referee for the Oregon Employment Division issued a decision concluding that franchisees of Lyle Graddon (NMC’s founder and president) and NACOR, doing business as National Maintenance Contractors of Oregon, were “not in a relationship of employer-employee or a status…”
Necanicum Inv. Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 164 P.3d 1197 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“105 as meaning “all remuneration for employment” 3 (emphasis added), and “employment” is defined in ORS 657.030 as “service for an employer * * * performed for remuneration or under any contract of hire.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.030(2) — 4 cases
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.030(2)(b) — 2 cases
Salem Coll. & Academy, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 695 P.2d 25 (Or. 1985).
“ORS 657.030(2)(b) expressly so provides. We do not know whether the Secretary of Labor will persist in his interpretation of the exemptions from FUTA involved here until the United States Supreme Court resolves the constitutional questions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.030(3) — 1 case
Emp. Departmet v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc., 204 P.3d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“In 1985, a referee for the Oregon Employment Division issued a decision concluding that franchisees of Lyle Graddon (NMC’s founder and president) and NACOR, doing business as National Maintenance Contractors of Oregon, were “not in a relationship of employer-employee or a status…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.030(l) — 1 case
Broadway Cab LLC v. Emp. Dep't, 364 P.3d 338 (Or. 2015).
“505(2), and “employment” is “service for an employer” that is “performed for remuneration,” ORS 657.030(1). Read together, those statutes require Broadway to pay unemployment insurance taxes on sums paid to drivers for services performed for Broadway for remuneration.”
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.