Comments for Ohio Employment, Labor and Worker's Compensation Law

Comment on Workers Compensation and Statutory Subrogation by Charles J. Cochran, Jr.

Charles J. Cochran, Jr. — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:13:26 +0000

This article addresses Statutory Subrogation imposed not by any implication, or by contract but as its name indicates by Statute. I think that anyone who knows a little bit of the history of the Ohio Worker’s Compensation statute involving subrogation would agree that implication has little to do with subrogating worker’s compensation benefits. The Statutory Subrogation imposed in the realm of Ohio Worker’s Compensation paints with a much broader brush than what subrogation might mean under Contract or even under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) interpretation of subrogation. I believe that the WoDoHr writer has taken their conceptualization of subrogation from the UCC and seeks to bring it in to define the parameters in this situation. I could be wrong but the words “surety” “creditor” and “security interest” sound a lot like UCC terminology. Please understand, I am not attacking the commenter they have raised a very interesting point (which is the reason that I approved the comment for posting) I just cannot see it as applicable to the point of my article. I do not see the Bureau of Worker’s Compensation or even a Self-Insured Employer being a Surety, or a security interest as being created and who would be the Creditor spoken of in the comment. I would invite comment by someone more conversant in the UCC to help clear this up for us all.

_{»crosslinked«}

Comment on Workers Compensation and Statutory Subrogation by workers comp

workers comp — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:52:20 +0000

In relation to a surety’s subrogation rights, the surety will also have the benefit of any security interest in favour of the creditor for the original debt. Conceptually this is an important point, as the subrogee will take the subrogor’s security rights by operation of law, even if the subrogee had been unaware of them. Accordingly, in this area of the law at least, it is conceptually improbable that the right of subrogation is based upon any implied term.

Comment on Employee or Independant Contractor? by Charles J. Cochran, Jr.

Charles J. Cochran, Jr. — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:33:19 +0000

Craig: The question you pose is not one subject to an easy response, even such a general one as follows, as these matters are all very fact driven. That said, the Independent Contrator (IC) classification of workers has become one that the IRS has even more scrutinized as time progresses. At one point in time the IRS checklist was a helpful aid to help suggest IC/Employee status for other entities but it, in itself, might not be the final determiner. You might keep in mind that one part, and there are other others, of the reason the employer uses the IC classification is to limit their obligation for paying premium, or other obligation, relating to Workers Compensation. This is not necessarily a bad thing as many IC’s are already paying for their own Workers Compensation Insurance and the absence of the additional expense associated with an employee, vice IC, might serve to make for a more compeititive payment for work performed. If you are injured you might have, looking only at Workers Compensation, an argument that you are an employee of that employer instead of an IC. Of course this “might” depends upon a lot of things I will not comment upon due to the general nature of this blog. Because of the wide and substantialy severe, for the employer, impact of such a determination you may well face an employer willing to expend substantial effort in opposing any claim by you to be an employee. If you are viewed as an IC in any later determination then, absent your separate application and approval for your own personal Workers Compensation coverage and payment of premium, you are left in a potentially poor postion in respect to your participation in the Workers Compensation Program. If injured you may find yourself not only limited in what you can do physically but financially. This would probably not be the best time to find out if you are covered by any employer’s workers compensation policy. It just concerns me to leave such a potentially life changing benefit as workers compensation coverage subject to a later determination. If adverse, this determination could not only impact your ability to obtain medical treatment but also to obtain even the wage support type benefits of Temporary Total or other important benefits which might be available under the Workers Compensation Fund if you had been deemed an employee or carried you own Workers Compensation Policy. I am not advising you in this matter and certainly do not represent you, and this blog was not put in place to give any type of advice or provide information that people should base their decisions upon, but rather, to make general comments/observations and sometimes raise a question in peoples minds to make them inquire more fully. If your circumstances give you concern you may wish to obtain the advice of competent legal counsel prior to the time you find yourself in need of a clearer determination.

Comment on Employee or Independant Contractor? by Craig Saunders

Craig Saunders — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 16:30:07 +0000

My question is i resentlly got hired by a trucking company in ohio as a independent contract driver he supplying the truck, paying for fuel ,e.t.c will i still be recognized as a employee and what should i look out for my # 513-828-9377

Comment on A Hybrid of Worker’s Compensation and Personal Injury. by Personal injury ft lauderdale

Personal injury ft lauderdale — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:00:23 +0000

@ charles… “The caution is that a practitioner must keep themselves fully aware of all elements of an injury claim and not just with the part they are most familiar with.”

Really important, especially for the larger firms with more volume and less actual time spent on the case by the attorney.