657.471 Manner
of charging benefits to employer; request for relief from charges. (1) Except as otherwise provided
in this section, benefits paid to an eligible individual shall be charged to
each of the individual’s employers during the base year in the same proportion
that the wages paid by each employer to the individual during the base year
bear to the wages paid by all employers to that individual during that year.
(2) The account
of an employer, other than a political subdivision electing to pay taxes under
ORS 657.509, may not be charged with benefits paid an unemployed individual in
excess of one-third of the base year wages paid that individual while in the
employ of the employer.
(3) Benefits paid
to an individual for unemployment immediately after the expiration of a period
of disqualification for having left the employment of an employer voluntarily
without good cause may not be charged to the employer.
(4) Benefits paid
to an individual for unemployment immediately after the expiration of a period
of disqualification for having been discharged by an employer for misconduct
may not be charged to the employer.
(5) Benefits paid
without any disqualification to an individual may not be charged to an employer
of the individual for the immediate period of unemployment if:
(a) The
individual left the employment of the employer voluntarily for good cause not
attributable to the employer; or
(b) The employer
discharged the individual because the individual was unable to satisfy a job
prerequisite required by law or administrative rule.
(6) If it is
determined under the provisions of subsection (3), (4) or (5) of this section
that benefits paid to an individual may not be charged to an employer, the
employer’s account may not be charged for any benefits paid for any subsequent
period or periods of unemployment during the individual’s affected benefit year
or during any benefit year beginning within 52 weeks subsequent to the affected
benefit year.
(7)(a) A
base-year employer that is not otherwise eligible for relief of charges for
benefits under this section and that receives notification of an initial valid
determination of a claim may request relief of charges if the claim is made by
an individual who:
(A) Left the
employment of the employer voluntarily and not for reasons attributable to the
employer;
(B) Was
disqualified for the individual’s most recent separation from the employer by a
determination of the Director of the Employment Department that the individual
has been discharged for misconduct connected with the employment for the
employer; or
(C) Was
discharged for reasons that would be disqualifying under ORS 657.176 (2)(a),
(b), (f), (g) or (h).
(b)(A) A request
under paragraph (a)(A) of this subsection:
(i) Must advise
the director in writing of the date on which the individual left employment,
state that the individual left voluntarily and not for reasons attributable to
the employer and give the reason for which the individual left employment.
(ii) May not be
granted if the individual was reemployed by the employer prior to the filing of
the initial valid claim.
(B) A request
under paragraph (a)(C) of this subsection must specify the date of the
discharge and the reasons why the employer believes the discharge was for
reasons that would be disqualifying under ORS 657.176 (2)(a), (b), (f), (g) or
(h).
(c) A request for
relief under this subsection must be sent to the department within 30 days
after the date on which the notice provided for under ORS 657.266 is mailed or
delivered to the employer.
(d) Upon receipt
of the request from the employer, the director shall review the information
provided by the employer and determine whether the employer is entitled to
relief of charges for benefits paid to the individual during the benefit year.
If the director determines that the employer is entitled to relief of charges,
the director shall grant the relief.
(e)(A) The
determination of the director under paragraph (a)(A) and (C) of this subsection
is final in all cases unless an application for hearing is filed within 20 days
after delivery of the determination, or, if mailed, within 20 days after the
determination was mailed to the employer’s last-known address.
(B) When a
request for hearing has been timely filed, an administrative law judge shall be
assigned to conduct a hearing.
(C) After the
administrative law judge has afforded all parties an opportunity for a fair
hearing, the administrative law judge shall affirm or reverse the determination
and promptly notify all parties entitled to notice of the decision and the
reasons for the decision.
(D) Decisions of
the administrative law judge under this subsection are final and may be
judicially reviewed as provided in ORS 657.684 to the extent applicable.
(8)(a) If the
director finds that an employer or the employer’s agent, in submitting facts
under subsection (7) of this section, willfully makes a false statement or
representation or willfully fails to report a material fact concerning the
termination of an individual’s employment, the director shall make a
determination charging the employer’s reserve account not less than two nor
more than 10 times the weekly benefit amount of the claimant or claimants.
(b) The director
shall give notice to the employer of the determination under this subsection
and the determination of the director is final unless an application for
hearing is filed in the manner provided for in subsection (7)(e) of this
section.
(9) Benefits paid
to an individual may not be charged to a base-year employer if:
(a) The employer
furnished part-time work to the individual during the base year;
(b) The
individual has become eligible for benefits because of loss of employment with
one or more other employers;
(c) The employer
has continued to furnish part-time work to the individual in substantially the
same amount as during the individual’s base year; and
(d) The employer
requests relief of charges within 30 days of the date the notice provided for
in ORS 657.266 is mailed or delivered to the employer.
(10) Benefits
paid to an individual for unemployment due to the return of a covered
individual, as defined in ORS 657B.010, who was temporarily replaced by the
individual for a period of family leave, medical leave or safe leave under ORS
chapter 657B may not be charged to the employer of the covered individual.
(11)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, benefits paid to an
individual shall be charged to an employer’s account if:
(a) The employer
or the employer’s agent fails to respond timely or adequately to a request from
the Employment Department for information relating to the claim for benefits;
(b) The failure
to respond causes an overpayment of benefits to the claimant; and
(c) The employer
or the employer’s agent has a pattern of failing to respond timely or
adequately to requests from the department for information relating to claims
for benefits. [Formerly 657.466; 1967 c.435 §5; 1973 c.300 §12; 1975 c.257 §10;
1977 c.294 §6; 1983 c.518 §1; 1993 c.778 §22; 1995 c.79 §332; 1995 c.683 §1;
1997 c.59 §2; 1999 c.416 §1; 1999 c.849 §130; 1999 c.970 §1; 2003 c.75 §102;
2003 c.792 §3; 2013 c.704 §1; 2019 c.700 §55]
657.472 [1957 c.699 §8(3); repealed by
1963 c.354 §1 (657.552, 657.652, 657.679, 657.681 and 657.683 enacted in lieu
of 657.472, 657.512, 657.550 and 657.672)]
Notes of Decisions
Vavrosky Maccoll Olson Busch & Pfeifer PC v. Emp. Dep't, 157 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 46× “ORS 657.471 provides, in part: “(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (2) to (7) and (10) of this section, benefits paid to an eligible individual shall be charged to each of the individual’s employers during the base year in the same proportion that the wages paid by…”
The Mann Home v. Morgan, 529 P.2d 964 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
· cites it 5× “If we were to adopt the construction of ORS 657.471 (3) urged by petitioners, this would result in the payment of benefits from the Fund without a corresponding payment of taxes or reimbursement of the Fund by the employer with respect to these former employes.”
Friedlander v. Emp. Div., 676 P.2d 314 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“See ORS 657.471(1). Therefore, the cases merit consolidated treatment.”
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 30× “The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
Johnson v. Emp. Div., 861 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 19× “That form, mailed pursuant to ORS 657.471, allowed employer to request relief from charges resulting from the unemployment benefits paid to Light.”
Nat'l Maint. Contractors of Oregon, Inc. v. Emp. Dep't, 204 P.3d 162 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“*601 PER CURIAM Petitioner seeks judicial review of an order of the Employment Department that denied petitioner relief from certain unemployment insurance charges under ORS 657.471. Petitioner argues that it should have been relieved of the charges because its franchisees are…”
Gilberts v. Emp. Div., 564 P.2d 1073 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 8× “As here applicable, ORS 657.471(7) establishes a two-step procedure whereby an employer may seek relief from charges to his account for unemployment benefits paid to a former employe.”
Kroetch v. Emp. Dep't, 341 P.3d 137 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “ORS 657.471 provides standards and a process for an employer to request relief from the charges that result from a determination that a claimant is eligible for unemployment compensation benefits under ORS 657.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(1) — 4 cases
Friedlander v. Emp. Div., 676 P.2d 314 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“See ORS 657.471(1). Therefore, the cases merit consolidated treatment.”
Vavrosky Maccoll Olson Busch & Pfeifer PC v. Emp. Dep't, 157 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 657.471 provides, in part: “(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (2) to (7) and (10) of this section, benefits paid to an eligible individual shall be charged to each of the individual’s employers during the base year in the same proportion that the wages paid by…”
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
Johnson v. Emp. Div., 861 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“That form, mailed pursuant to ORS 657.471, allowed employer to request relief from charges resulting from the unemployment benefits paid to Light.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(10) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(3) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(5) — 3 cases
Vavrosky Maccoll Olson Busch & Pfeifer PC v. Emp. Dep't, 157 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 657.471 provides, in part: “(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (2) to (7) and (10) of this section, benefits paid to an eligible individual shall be charged to each of the individual’s employers during the base year in the same proportion that the wages paid by…”
Johnson v. Emp. Div., 861 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“That form, mailed pursuant to ORS 657.471, allowed employer to request relief from charges resulting from the unemployment benefits paid to Light.”
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(5)(b) — 1 case
Vavrosky Maccoll Olson Busch & Pfeifer PC v. Emp. Dep't, 157 P.3d 312 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 657.471 provides, in part: “(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (2) to (7) and (10) of this section, benefits paid to an eligible individual shall be charged to each of the individual’s employers during the base year in the same proportion that the wages paid by…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(7) — 3 cases
Johnson v. Emp. Div., 861 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“That form, mailed pursuant to ORS 657.471, allowed employer to request relief from charges resulting from the unemployment benefits paid to Light.”
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
Gilberts v. Emp. Div., 564 P.2d 1073 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
“As here applicable, ORS 657.471(7) establishes a two-step procedure whereby an employer may seek relief from charges to his account for unemployment benefits paid to a former employe.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(7)(a) — 1 case
Gilberts v. Emp. Div., 564 P.2d 1073 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
“As here applicable, ORS 657.471(7) establishes a two-step procedure whereby an employer may seek relief from charges to his account for unemployment benefits paid to a former employe.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(7)(c) — 1 case
Gilberts v. Emp. Div., 564 P.2d 1073 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
“As here applicable, ORS 657.471(7) establishes a two-step procedure whereby an employer may seek relief from charges to his account for unemployment benefits paid to a former employe.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(9) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(9)(a) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.471(9)(b) — 1 case
Hooton, Wold & Okrent, LLP v. Emp. Dep't, 391 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“The department sent petitioner notice of the potential charges and petitioner requested relief from those charges under ORS 657.471. The *779 department denied relief, citing Hooten’s continued employment with petitioner.”
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.