Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150 (2026)

Amount of benefits; length of employment and wages necessary to qualify for benefits; rules

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

      657.150 Amount of benefits; length of employment and wages necessary to qualify for benefits; rules. (1) An individual shall be paid benefits for weeks during the benefit year in an amount that is to be determined by taking into account the individual’s work in subject employment in the base year as provided in this section.

      (2)(a) To qualify for benefits an individual must have:

      (A) Worked in subject employment in the base year with total base year wages of $1,000 or more and have total base year wages equal to or in excess of one and one-half times the wages in the highest quarter of the base year; and

      (B) Have earned wages in subject employment equal to six times the individual’s weekly benefit amount in employment for service performed subsequent to the beginning of a preceding benefit year if benefits were paid to the individual for any week in the preceding benefit year.

      (b) If the individual does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(A) of this subsection, the individual may qualify for benefits if the individual has worked a minimum of 500 hours in employment subject to this chapter during the base year.

      (3) If the wages paid to an individual are not based upon a fixed period of time or if wages are paid at irregular intervals or in such manner as not to extend regularly over the period of employment, for the purposes of subsections (2) to (5) of this section, the individual’s wages shall be allocated in accordance with rules prescribed by the Director of the Employment Department. Such rules shall, insofar as possible, produce results the same as those that would exist if the individual had been paid wages at regular intervals. The director may adopt rules to attribute hours of work to an individual if the individual is not paid on an hourly basis or if the employer does not report the number of hours worked.

      (4)(a) An eligible individual’s weekly benefit amount shall be 1.25 percent of the total wages paid in the individual’s base year. However, such amount shall not be less than the minimum, nor more than the maximum weekly benefit amount.

      (b) The minimum weekly benefit amount shall be 15 percent (0.1500) of the state average weekly covered wage for the preceding calendar year, effective for any benefit year commencing on and after the week that includes July 4, 1975, and the week that includes each July 4 thereafter.

      (c) The maximum weekly benefit amount shall be:

      (A) Fifty-five percent (0.5500) of the state average weekly covered wage for calendar year 1979, effective for any benefit year commencing with and after the week that includes July 4, 1980, and through any benefit year commencing with the week that includes June 27, 1981.

      (B) Fifty-five percent (0.5500) of the state average weekly covered wage for calendar year 1980, effective for any benefit year commencing with and after the week that includes July 4, 1981, through any benefit year commencing with the week that includes September 27, 1981.

      (C) Fifty-eight percent (0.5800) of the state average weekly covered wage for calendar year 1980, effective for any benefit year commencing with and after the week that includes October 4, 1981, through any benefit year commencing with the week that includes June 27, 1982.

      (D) Sixty percent (0.6000) of the state average weekly covered wage for calendar year 1981, effective for any benefit year commencing with and after the week that includes July 4, 1982, through any benefit year commencing with the week that includes June 27, 1983.

      (E) Sixty-four percent (0.6400) of the state average covered weekly wage for the preceding calendar year, effective for any benefit year commencing with and after the week that includes July 4, 1983, and the week that includes each July 4 thereafter.

      (d) All weekly benefit amounts, if not a multiple of $1, shall be computed to the next lower multiple of $1.

      (e) For the purposes of this subsection, the state average weekly covered wage means an amount determined by the Employment Department by dividing the total wages paid by subject employers during the year by 52 times the average monthly employment reported by subject employers for the year.

      (5) Benefits paid to an eligible individual in a benefit year shall not exceed 26 times the individual’s weekly benefit amount, or one-third of the base year’s wages paid, whichever is the lesser. If such amount is not a multiple of $1, it shall be computed to the next lower multiple of $1.

      (6) An eligible unemployed individual who has employment in any week shall have the individual’s weekly benefit amount reduced, but not below zero, by the amount of earnings paid or payable that exceeds the greater of:

      (a) Ten times the minimum hourly wage established by the laws of this state; or

      (b) One-third of the individual’s weekly benefit amount.

      (7) Payment that has been, is or will be paid to an individual for a holiday or vacation shall be considered as earnings in the determination of the amount of benefits payable with respect to the week in which the holiday or vacation falls in the same manner as provided in subsection (6) of this section. However, if payment for the holiday or vacation is paid more than 45 days prior to the holiday or vacation or is delayed more than 45 days following the end of the week in which the holiday or vacation falls, the provisions of this section do not apply and previously reduced benefits shall be adjusted accordingly.

      (8) Payment that has been or is paid to an individual as back pay shall be considered as earnings in the determination of the amount of benefits payable with respect to the period for which the back pay has been or is paid.

      (9) Payment that has been, or will be, made to an individual as a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces of the United States, including the organized militia of the State of Oregon, for the performance of inactive duty training shall not be considered as earnings in the determination of the amount of benefits payable. [1955 c.655 §15; 1957 c.699 §1; 1959 c.567 §1; 1961 c.211 §1; 1963 c.441 §1; 1967 c.434 §1; 1969 c.569 §1; 1971 c.463 §13; 1971 c.521 §1; 1973 c.146 §1; 1973 c.535 §1; 1975 c.661 §2; 1977 c.670 §1; 1981 c.77 §10; 1981 c.751 §1; 1983 c.51 §1; 1987 c.257 §1; 1989 c.897 §1; 1995 c.104 §1; 1995 c.105 §4; 1995 c.153 §1; 2020 s.s.2 c.1 §§1,3; 2021 c.388 §§5,6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1959–2023 · leading case: Pam's Carpet Serv., Inc. v. Emp. Div., 613 P.2d 52 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
Pam's Carpet Serv., Inc. v. Emp. Div., 613 P.2d 52 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 10× “ORS 657.150 requires that unemployment compensation claimants have earned certain minimum amounts in order to be eligible for benefits.”
State v. Burris, 518 P.3d 891 (Or. 2022). · cites it 3× “Thus ‘ORS 657.150 to 657.215’ was changed to ‘ORS 657.”
Lane v. Emp. Dep't, 213 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “100; and (2) when determining, under ORS 657.150(6), whether “[a]n eligible unemployed individual who has employment in any week” has, as a consequence, a reduction in that week’s unemployment benefits in light of the earnings from the employment.”
McKean-Coffman v. Emp. Div., 824 P.2d 410 (Or. 1992). “ORS 657.150 et seq. 3 *546 The Employment Division (Division) denied claimant unemployment benefits on the ground that she had received a lump sum payment of retirement funds when her employment terminated, which she could have received in the form of periodic payments, and that…”
Sharp v. Emp. Div., 615 P.2d 374 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 5× “"ORS 657.150 2 requires that unemployment compensation claimants have earned certain minimum *742 amounts in order to be eligible for benefits.”
Carpet Mill & Lighthouse v. Emp. Div., 642 P.2d 354 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “While compensation in amounts less them the minimum specified in ORS 657.150 may tip the scale toward lack of ecomonic independency once a colorable claim of being an independent contractor has been made, the opposite does not necessarily follow.”
Tracy v. Emp. Div., 565 P.2d 403 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 9× “We adopt as our opinion in this case the following abstracts from respondent’s brief: "The sole issue in this case is whether petitioner satisfied the requirements of ORS 657.150 so as to be eligible for unemployment compensation.”
Bergun v. Emp. Div., 726 P.2d 1202 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 8× “ORS 657.150(8) provides that vacation pay is not considered as earnings in determining the amount of unemployment benefits payable.”
Laing v. Emp. Div., 850 P.2d 1136 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 8× “150(3) is pertinent for reporting purposes, the statute limits its application to subsections (2) to (5) of ORS 657.150, which set forth the formula for calculating base year wages.”
Emp. Div. v. Ring, 803 P.2d 766 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 3× “Claimant appealed to EAB, which set aside the referee’s decision. It ruled that claimant had provided no services to her employer during the weeks at issue and that the amount of back pay received did not reduce her unemployment benefits under ORS 657.”
Stanley v. Emp. Div., 607 P.2d 1195 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 5× “This case turns on an interpretation of ORS 657.150(8), which reads: *910 "Payment made to an individual for vacation taken shall be considered in the determination of the amount of benefits payable with respect to the vacation period in the same manner as provided in subsection…”
Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Emp. Div., 712 P.2d 154 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “Because Stanley involved the effect of vacation payments on unemployment benefits, the case turned on an interpretation of ORS 657.150(8) (amended by Or Laws 1983, ch 51, §1), which provided: 3 “Payment made to an individual for vacation taken shall be considered in the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(1) — 2 cases
Dufka v. Emp. Div., 742 P.2d 624 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
Tracy v. Emp. Div., 565 P.2d 403 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “We adopt as our opinion in this case the following abstracts from respondent’s brief: "The sole issue in this case is whether petitioner satisfied the requirements of ORS 657.150 so as to be eligible for unemployment compensation.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(10) — 2 cases
Allard v. Emp. Div., 719 P.2d 1325 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
Tektronix, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 777 P.2d 1005 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(2) — 8 cases
Miller v. Emp. Div. & U. Gospel Mission, 610 P.2d 293 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
Zimbrick v. Morgan, 477 P.2d 908 (Or. Ct. App. 1970).
White v. Emp. Div., 694 P.2d 1009 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
Rash v. Emp. Div., 737 P.2d 966 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
Emp. Div. v. Peddicord, 865 P.2d 384 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(2)(a) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(2)(a)(B) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(3) — 2 cases
Laing v. Emp. Div., 850 P.2d 1136 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “150(3) is pertinent for reporting purposes, the statute limits its application to subsections (2) to (5) of ORS 657.150, which set forth the formula for calculating base year wages.”
Peterson v. Emp. Div., 730 P.2d 1295 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(6) — 10 cases
Lane v. Emp. Dep't, 213 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). “100; and (2) when determining, under ORS 657.150(6), whether “[a]n eligible unemployed individual who has employment in any week” has, as a consequence, a reduction in that week’s unemployment benefits in light of the earnings from the employment.”
Emp. Div. v. Ring, 803 P.2d 766 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “Claimant appealed to EAB, which set aside the referee’s decision. It ruled that claimant had provided no services to her employer during the weeks at issue and that the amount of back pay received did not reduce her unemployment benefits under ORS 657.”
Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Laing v. Emp. Div., 850 P.2d 1136 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “150(3) is pertinent for reporting purposes, the statute limits its application to subsections (2) to (5) of ORS 657.150, which set forth the formula for calculating base year wages.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(7) — 4 cases
Alaska Tanker Co. v. Emp. Dep't, 61 P.3d 276 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Allard v. Emp. Div., 719 P.2d 1325 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
Adams v. Emp. Div., 643 P.2d 400 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
Tektronix, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 777 P.2d 1005 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(8) — 7 cases
Stanley v. Emp. Div., 607 P.2d 1195 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “This case turns on an interpretation of ORS 657.150(8), which reads: *910 "Payment made to an individual for vacation taken shall be considered in the determination of the amount of benefits payable with respect to the vacation period in the same manner as provided in subsection…”
Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Emp. Div., 712 P.2d 154 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “Because Stanley involved the effect of vacation payments on unemployment benefits, the case turned on an interpretation of ORS 657.150(8) (amended by Or Laws 1983, ch 51, §1), which provided: 3 “Payment made to an individual for vacation taken shall be considered in the…”
Hawkins v. Emp. Div., 552 P.2d 1325 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
Bergun v. Emp. Div., 726 P.2d 1202 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “ORS 657.150(8) provides that vacation pay is not considered as earnings in determining the amount of unemployment benefits payable.”
Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Emp. Div., 728 P.2d 26 (Or. 1986).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(9) — 3 cases
Bergun v. Emp. Div., 726 P.2d 1202 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “ORS 657.150(8) provides that vacation pay is not considered as earnings in determining the amount of unemployment benefits payable.”
Allard v. Emp. Div., 719 P.2d 1325 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
Tektronix, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 777 P.2d 1005 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.150(9)(b) — 2 cases
Bergun v. Emp. Div., 726 P.2d 1202 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “ORS 657.150(8) provides that vacation pay is not considered as earnings in determining the amount of unemployment benefits payable.”
Tektronix, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 777 P.2d 1005 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
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.