Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200

Definitions for ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      659A.200 Definitions for ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224. As used in ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224:

      (1) “Disciplinary action” includes but is not limited to any discrimination, dismissal, demotion, transfer, reassignment, supervisory reprimand, warning of possible dismissal or withholding of work, whether or not the action affects or will affect employee compensation.

      (2) “Employee” means a person:

      (a) Employed by or under contract with the state or any agency of or political subdivision in the state;

      (b) Employed by or under contract with any person authorized to act on behalf of the state, or agency of the state or subdivision in the state, with respect to control, management or supervision of any employee;

      (c) Employed by the public corporation created under ORS 656.751;

      (d) Employed by a contractor who performs services for the state, agency or subdivision, other than employees of a contractor under contract to construct a public improvement;

      (e) Employed by or under contract with any person authorized by contract to act on behalf of the state, agency or subdivision;

      (f) Employed by a nonprofit organization; or

      (g) Serving as a member of a board of directors of a nonprofit organization who is not otherwise considered an employee.

      (3) “Information” includes public and private records, documents and electronically stored data.

      (4) “Knowledge” means actual knowledge.

      (5) “Nonprofit organization” or “nonprofit” means an organization or group of organizations that:

      (a) Receives public funds by way of grant or contract; and

      (b) Is exempt from income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

      (6) “Public employer” means:

      (a) The state or any agency of or political subdivision in the state;

      (b) Any person authorized to act on behalf of the state, or any agency of or political subdivision in the state, with respect to control, management or supervision of any employee; or

      (c) An employer who employs an employee described in subsection (2)(a) to (e) of this section.

      (7) “School” means a common school district, a union high school district, an education service district, a public charter school, a private school providing instruction to any grade from kindergarten through grade 12 or a community college district.

      (8) “School services” means any of the following services:

      (a) Custodial or janitorial services;

      (b) Nutrition services;

      (c) Transportation services; or

      (d) Any other education services that are customarily performed by school employees.

      (9) “School services employee” means a person employed by a school services employer to provide school services to a school.

      (10) “School services employer” means a private employer that enters into a contract with a school to provide school services to the school. [Formerly 659.505; 2014 c.78 §2; 2015 c.3 §49; 2016 c.73 §3; 2020 s.s.3 c.4 §4]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2011–2025 · leading case: Janell Howard v. City of Coos Bay
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Janell Howard v. City of Coos Bay (2017) ca9 · cites it 2× “230, a closely related provision of the Act, Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200, provides a number of definitions of “employee.”
Dinicola v. State (2016) orctapp · cites it 13× “” On its face, the definition of “employee” under ORS 659A.200 is distinctly different from the definition of “employee” under the FLSA.”
Harper v. Mt. Hood Community College (2016) orctapp · cites it 3× “ORS 659A.200 and ORS 659A.203 were amended in 2016, effective January 1, 2017, but, those amendments are immaterial to the issue on appeal.”
Burley v. Clackamas Cnty. (2019) orctapp · cites it 2× “200(6) (defining "public employer" for purposes of ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224 ); ORS 659A.270(1) (identifying "covered employer[s]" for purposes of ORS 659A.”
Dr. William P. Harman v. University of Tennessee (2011) tenn · cites it 2× “2011)); Oregon (Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(1) (2009)); South Carolina ( S.”
Janet v. Marshall (2013) nmctapp “]” Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(b) (2012). And Pennsylvania’s whistleblower statute defines a public employer as “[a] person supervising one or more employees, including the employee in question; a superior of that supervisor; or an agent of a public body.”
Walker v. Oregon Travel Information Council (2019) orctapp “206, except as provided in ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224, it is an unlawful employment practice for any public or nonprofit employer to: “* * * * * “(b) Prohibit any employee from disclosing, or take or threaten to take disciplinary action against an employee for the disclosure of…”
Reyna v. City of Portland (2025) ord · cites it 10× “The City asks the court to narrowly interpret the term “discrimination” as used in ORS § 659A.200(1), based on the ordinary meaning of the term being defined, “disciplinary action.”
Sornson v. Oregon Commission on Children (2012) ord · cites it 5× “ORS 659A.200 defines the term “employee” as meaning: [A] person employed by or under contract with .”
JaNet v. Marshall (2012) nmctapp “]” Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(b) (2012). And Pennsylvania’s whistleblower statute defines a public employer as “[a] person supervising one or more employees, including the employee in question; a superior of that supervisor; or an agent of a public body.”
McClusky v. City of North Bend (2024) orctapp “On appeal, plaintiff argues that the definition of “public employer,” ORS 659A.200(6), does not limit the report in ORS 659A.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(1) — 2 cases
Dr. William P. Harman v. University of Tennessee (2011) tenn “2011)); Oregon (Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(1) (2009)); South Carolina ( S.”
Reyna v. City of Portland (2025) ord “The City asks the court to narrowly interpret the term “discrimination” as used in ORS § 659A.200(1), based on the ordinary meaning of the term being defined, “disciplinary action.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(2) — 1 case
Dinicola v. State (2016) orctapp “” On its face, the definition of “employee” under ORS 659A.200 is distinctly different from the definition of “employee” under the FLSA.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(2)(a) — 3 cases
Harper v. Mt. Hood Community College (2016) orctapp “ORS 659A.200 and ORS 659A.203 were amended in 2016, effective January 1, 2017, but, those amendments are immaterial to the issue on appeal.”
Dinicola v. State (2016) orctapp “” On its face, the definition of “employee” under ORS 659A.200 is distinctly different from the definition of “employee” under the FLSA.”
Sornson v. Oregon Commission on Children (2012) ord “ORS 659A.200 defines the term “employee” as meaning: [A] person employed by or under contract with .”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3) — 1 case
Dinicola v. State (2016) orctapp “” On its face, the definition of “employee” under ORS 659A.200 is distinctly different from the definition of “employee” under the FLSA.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(a) — 1 case
Sornson v. Oregon Commission on Children (2012) ord “ORS 659A.200 defines the term “employee” as meaning: [A] person employed by or under contract with .”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(b) — 2 cases
Janet v. Marshall (2013) nmctapp “]” Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(b) (2012). And Pennsylvania’s whistleblower statute defines a public employer as “[a] person supervising one or more employees, including the employee in question; a superior of that supervisor; or an agent of a public body.”
JaNet v. Marshall (2012) nmctapp “]” Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(3)(b) (2012). And Pennsylvania’s whistleblower statute defines a public employer as “[a] person supervising one or more employees, including the employee in question; a superior of that supervisor; or an agent of a public body.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.200(6) — 3 cases
Burley v. Clackamas Cnty. (2019) orctapp “200(6) (defining "public employer" for purposes of ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224 ); ORS 659A.270(1) (identifying "covered employer[s]" for purposes of ORS 659A.”
Harper v. Mt. Hood Community College (2016) orctapp “ORS 659A.200 and ORS 659A.203 were amended in 2016, effective January 1, 2017, but, those amendments are immaterial to the issue on appeal.”
McClusky v. City of North Bend (2024) orctapp “On appeal, plaintiff argues that the definition of “public employer,” ORS 659A.200(6), does not limit the report in ORS 659A.”
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.