OFFICE OFTHEATTORNEY QENERALOFTRXAS 

4 AUSTIN 

l- Go MANN 

,-ou- 

:: 

Ron. ClautIe A. Wlliama 

chairman end Exeoutlve Director 

I Texas Unem*loynmat Gompeosmtlon Wmmlsaion 

BmtmnB--g 

, Texas 

Dear sirt 

. 

reading as 

pfiylbent of aaT s6rler of 

in, he hes been tot- or 

ing period of oae week. Ho 

ing pmlod week for the 

"*(I) unless he has registei'ed at an employnkt 

office in aocord~ce, with see. c(a) or this Act; 

e*(2) unless it is the w6e&$mmd.iate~ preceding Or 

the reek immediately SollowIng th@~~ili.n&Oi tm ioithl 

claim, as the ~oma;Lealon may by regulat2oq@rseorlbe~ 
3’73,: 

xwa. ol,au&e A. wirriauu5, page & " 

"'(3) if benefits have been paid with resprot thareto.' 

i *Bemeflte am paid with rerpeat to .b?nafit pWlo6s 

aooording to the terms of Seotlon 8 (Seotlon 1, ytlo$o 

622lb, V.R. C. S.), auoh benefit periods oonslet%ng bi 

fourtesn Bays eaah. So&ion 6(a) (krtiole 52Elb, Se&ion 

4(a) V. R. C. 3.) prwidee that: 

.**Claims for benefits 6hall be arada in aaoodumm 

with au8h regalatlone a8 the Commission aafr prmoribd,’ 

*Your adrlee 18 requested upon the following questfoal 

-'Way the Conrnission by regulation prasorlbe that the 

waiting period of one weak ahall.be the week lmm&diat&y follbwing the filing of an iriitlal ola&m and that'beneiitr my 

-: be paid for the benefit period of two realm fameiHatel$ 

following the fiH.ng of tha inltfal o&aim, aasrrrlng'that 

tb8 inairiduai appl+g ror suoh beneffte f6 .othwwi80 

allglbke and that looper appliaatLon 14 made. Baaatlta 

*annot hate been paid far a beaefit pariod uadar w'?iroumstaaeee until several days aitdy the arplratlon of'tho' 

rourtean days aampriainp, auoh banaflt period. The first 

initial alalm fllad ,bg an tndiridual is not oompailabli.* 

You request the opinion or this departmant &on the 

oamtruotlon'oi' Nwaiting perlodN or *walttag period mak*, aa 

01atl in i3ubleOtlOn eof Seation 4 of the Twx~r UnamplcmmMi 

donpensatioa Aot (Art&ale S821bLb, t. R. 0. S.), and the authorit3r 

of the Commlsalon t+aalte oertain 9Powaed regulations with 

reference thereto is Hated eubstantfally aa ~fOiloWar 

:' (1) May the CommiseLon by rsgulatlcm fleseiba that 

she *w&%ti&g parfod* or ,*waltlng+arioU week", i&uaad in the 

l tatukr, be the week ltmealately following the filfng of a@ 

tnftiai. olaim and begin aying benefits for the flrnt benefit 

puioa or two weeka 1Kmle a: lately rm0ting~ the filing of thhe 

Initial ala&m. 

Year inquiry aamums that the assplogea doem not 

labor andam any other diequaliiiaatlon for reoeiving benefita 

prori&xl for in the atatuta. The oonolu@Son ie have reaohad 

a8 herallnaftsr expressed is based upon careful aonaidaration 

and research. In reachin{; a oonplasion rrpon tha Wniadiate 
3744 iA

Bon. Cl.audo 4. Williams, page 3 

quoetlon her0 OonSibereb, it is irportaut to note what we 

think may be generallJr aooepted aa the purpose of a Waiting 

period", whioh~ varier somewhat In length of time in the 

various atates. Our statute prasorlbes the shortest 'Waiting period”, one week, that has oome under our observation 

in our examination of 8lmilar provislone in other statea. 

The waiting period we think, 8erves three purpes0a: 

(1) it prWent.6 rapid depletion Of the unsaploymant fund by Lthere out Of rork for only a few,,d8ja; (8) it affords the 

uamplomaut agenoy an opportunity to find the applloant a 

Job; aad (a) &t gives the admlnletratfV0 aganoy time to appr8&8e the merits of the fuuployee's ala. Our stat&0 ~pl'ofide8 t&at the *waiting parlod week” be the week &m6cliatelJ 

prseedin(5 or the w0ekinnediatol~ folloning filln 

P 

of the 

*Iaim, a8 the Comrnleslon may by regulation pxesar be. lie 

therefore observe that by the elpreas lanya&e of the rtatuto the Rmmlaslon Is authorfxed k, fix the waiting puiod 

a8 the week immedlat01~ preaedlng or Immediately iollowing 

the iiliag of the initial claim. If the Conuztissioon by rogul+ 

tiaa fixer the walting period as the week ~$nunedfateLy folllawlng 

$he ii.lin(r of a alai.@ lmtead of &nmedlatel~ preoedl.&Q the 

Clling of tie olaim, euoh a regulation Is inour view legal 

and Jrutlfi~ bF the express langmade of the statute. 

Obvl0arly a more dirfi0tit &0stion~arire8 a8 bd 

&ther the Comairsiot. may bv reealatlon preiraribe that the 

iir8t bonsrtt’period or two weeks bogln imu0dlatol~ upon the 

flZiaQ of a beastit oleim. It la true that our stdute pro- 

+Id08..aolati for benefit8 ohall be mad,0 in ace~ord&¶U~ with 

auohregulatioas as'the Commisaien mCy 0eoslb0," but obfiou8lr 

qu0h regulation6 mn8t be oonslrtent wit r and not omnter to the 

,8tatute, I? ,we 8hould hold that the ffamnlsslq~ i3ay by rqnlation begin eta pay benefits immediately upon the filing of a 

ola$m, aa0umin~ that the cOmmisei0n has by rs(lu.lation 6esr&- 

mated the *waiting perioaN or vwaitlag period week” as the 

wok mdlately following the filing of a olaIm, we would 

in effeot hold that the *waiting period w0ek* is oompensable. 

TO 80 hold maid, in our opinion, render meaningless =a 

wele8r the providon of the statute poviaing for a Waiting 

period waokv. 0r *waiting period". A rule 0r statutory oon8tXuotiOn too WQU recognized to require oitation of extended 

authority la that it muat be asasunrod that the bBgialatur0 
375 

f6an. &laude A. Wllliaw?, page 4 

meant to give effeot and meaning to all word8 wgd In the statute eonaiatent uith the purpose to be aeoompllshed by the 

Banks v. State, 28 Texas 644; IPiaaouri-;;msw, Texas 

'B,. i. OO.'V. 2hOIzOson, 260 3. 'S. 325; HSil v. State 114 s. ‘;Y. 

It?,.; mmuerson v. u. 

8?14* 

3. Fidelity B Guaranty Co., 10's. n. (2a) 

36 thirlk, a8 used id OUT Ilttrhtute, that the leglelature 

me@ to prosorlbe a waitlnr period 8s a prere~ulelte for 

obtaining b enof ltd. To make the benefit period oompenseble 

would be lnconslstsnt with this oonoluaion. 

z!l?am the standpoint or ame lo&2 it 4een4 lnanif44t~ 

that a waiting period dellnltely L plies or carries tith it 

'bhe thought of waiting for something, which oould othewrr 

be obtained wer4 lt not forthe waiting ,perloU. In other 

Ma, ff the waiting period 1s aompenrable, there 1s nothing 

for the employee to wait, for, atfl fo'make it oompensable by 

rag'ulatlon would in effeot null fy the provlslon of the etatiute rhloh bapoaee the wait&g ptylc.4 ar a period during whluh 

the alalma&, even though otherwire eligible, must wait a 

given period of hwsa before reosivlng any QaJments. 

We are net u&lndful of the amendment to Sebtlon 4, 

prosorlblng benerit eliglbill~ oondltlons or the orlglnel 

kot 88 it prevailed up to 1939, from whioh tlms the present 

provision8 of Sect. 4 have been ln effeot, and we have eon- 

~ifdered th6 original, eat as amended and as it now 1s in dfeat 

with a risw of determining the effeot of thy ~m4ndpaent upon the 

pile&ion hors oonsldered. The original aot prssorlbed a two 

wsek waiting period instead of a 6ae week waitingperiod a8 

the present aet pravldee, but we are umbla to find that Waitlag perlod" or Valtlng period week*, 6s used Ln the oflginal 

act end as used lnthe emennbed not, carries wlth It any lndloation that the waiting period, whether oonsldersd in the light 

of the original eot or the smended set, 1s meant to be compensable. 

pfe think It &ear that the .waltFng period Is the period of t&no 

during vhloh no money payments of unemployment benefltr oan be 

made. It ie diatinguiehed from the benefit perlod, whioh ia a 

period of time dllring wfifoh ~payments of benefits oan be sade. 

We think both acta, the original and the amended, ol.aarly set 

forth a period of time when noney paymexte oan be made, and 

alao the period known as the "waiting period", and no suah 

waiting period could possibly overlap into the time raaerved 

tar making mi18y paymenta, 
: 

There is a dearth or judiQla1 lnterpretatioa oi the 

wrm Wafting period- or *waiting period week* aa used in the 

~ioue uuemploymmt compensatfori sots, but our investigation 

&rs revealed that departmental aonatruction of the verlous 

administrative agencies tbrou&out the country administering 

the eat invariably oonatrued the waiting period as nomompensable, and we are not able to oonstrue our statute &itia.ntlY. 

It therefore follows that it i8 our view that the 

vexa@ Unemployment coapenration Oomuission may by regulation 

prclsoribe the waiting period as the neek ImediatsLy roZlowing 

the filing or an innitlal olaia, but that benefits cannot be 

paid for said w?ek, Or in other worda, the Comr~iesion eaanot 

bq+n to pay benefits until the olaimfmt has served the prorepuielte ,~ltln& period week", which bannet overlap aq part 

of the benefit period,