 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Potter v. Hawaii Newspaper Agency2/19/1999
d be surplusage and a nullity. Our rules of statutory construction require us to reject an interpretation of statute that renders any part of the statutory language a nullity. See State v. Jumila, 87 Hawaii 1, 10, 950 P.2d 1201, 1210 (1998); Schultz v. Lujan, 86 Hawaii 137, 141, 948 P.2d 558, 562 (1997); Konno v. County of Hawaii, 85 Hawaii 61, 71, 937 P.2d 397, 401 (1997). Accordingly, we hold that no lawful claim for workers' compensation benefits was filed with the Director in the instant matter.
B. In The Absence Of A Lawful Claim, The Director Had No Authority Either To Award Or To Deny Benefits To Potter.
HRS § 386-86 (1993) provides in relevant part that " f a claim for compensation is made, the director shall make such further investigation as deemed necessary and render a decision within sixty days after the Conclusion of the hearing awarding or denying compensation . . . ." (Emphasis added.) The plain language of the statute establishes that "a claim for compensation" is a precondition of an order awarding or denying workers' compensation benefits. In the absence of a lawful claim, the Director lacked the statutory authority either to award or to deny benefits to Potter.
Unquestionably, the Director may issue declaratory rulings concerning whether, in a specific set of circumstances, a claimant would be entitled to workers' compensation benefits upon the bringing of a lawful claim. See Locations, Inc. v. Hawaii Dept. of Labor, 79 Hawaii 208, 900 P.2d 784 (1995). However, on the record before us, the determination that Potter would have been entitled to workers' compensation benefits had he chosen to file a claim is a far cry from a determination by the Director that the HNA may benefit from the HRS § 386-5 tort defense in an unrelated civil action.
C. By Electing To Contract With Potter As An "Independent Contractor" Through The Use Of A Contract Of Adhesion Prepared By Its Representatives, The HNA Gave Notice Of Its Intention To Opt Out Of The Protections Afforded It By HRS § 386-5.
It is apparent to us that the LIRAB's ruling on the HNA's appeal in the instant matter was based on a misapprehension of HRS ch. 386 and our precedents. The HNA urges that this court's decision in Locations compels affirmance of the LIRAB's favorable ruling. However, the present case is factually distinguishable from Locations. In that matter, a real estate sales company petitioned the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR) for a ruling that licensed real estate agents who performed sales activities pursuant to an "independent contractor agreement" were not employees, and, therefore, need not be afforded workers' compensation coverage. 79 Hawaii at 209, 900 P.2d at 785. This court held that the "control test" was the proper measure for determining whether an employer-employee relationship existed for purposes of the workers' compensation laws; after applying the control test, we further held that the real estate agents were independent contractors, unentitled to workers' compensation coverage. To that end, we observed in Locations:
"For purposes of coverage, HRS chapter 386, pertains only to "employees" who are "individual in the employment of another person." HRS § 386-1 (1985). With respect to independent contractors, this court has held that a party who hires an independent contractor is not an employer, and thus, "does not fall within the provisions of HRS § 386-5 which exempts employers from liability to their employees." Makaneole v. Gampon, 70 Haw. 501, 508, 777 P.2d 1183, 1187 (1989). It therefore follows that a party who contracts with an independent contractor need not provide workers' compensation coverage for that independent c
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Hawaii Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|