Source: https://complawmaine.com/decision/2014/wcb_abuse_investigation_unit_v._holyoke
Timestamp: 2020-05-31 07:17:37
Document Index: 375012388

Matched Legal Cases: ['§324', '§401', '§402', '§105', '§ 324', '§ 401', '§ 105']

WCB Abuse Investigation Unit v. Holyoke | Comp Guide
WCB Abuse Investigation Unit v. Holyoke
Independent Contractor Independent Contractor Penalties Statutory Construction
Penalties Employee v Contractor §324(3) §401 §402 §105-A
Appellate Division provides good discussion of the penalty requirement of § 324(3) where an employer fails to “secure payment” of workers’ compensation (WC insurance coverage) as required in §§ 401 and 403.
Holyoke is a building contractor that had 14 workers it deemed to be employees and 16 others it deemed to be independent contractors, and for which it had obtained pre-determination from the Board as independent contractors. Its WC insurance policy provided coverage for the 14 employees and provided that it would cover any workers later deemed to be employees.
An Audit concluded that Holyoke violated the Act because it failed to list the 16 independent contractors as employees. After hearing, an ALJ found that 9 of the 16 were misclassified and should have been listed as employees for coverage purposes. The status of the other 7 could not be determined on the evidence. The ALJ imposed a $30,000 penalty.
The Appellate panel upheld the ALJ’s conclusion that the fact the policy covered workers later deemed to be employees did not meet Holyoke’s obligation to secure payment for those employees under the Act. Good discussion of § 105-A “Construction Contractors”.