Opinion ID: 176580
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Classifying Cargill as a Subscribing Employer

Text: Espinoza argues that, assuming Cargill did purchase Workers' Compensation insurance, it never covered Espinoza with it, and thus Cargill is more properly characterized as a non-subscribing employer for purposes of TLC § 406.033. Cargill, however, is most fairly characterized as a subscribing employer. TLC § 406.033(e) provides that an employee may not waive [a] cause of action described in Subsection (a), and that [a]ny agreement by an employee to waive a cause of action or any right described in Subsection (a) before the employee's injury or death is void and unenforceable. (emphasis added). Subsection (a) of TLC § 406.033, in turn, refers to an action against an employer who does not have workers' compensation insurance coverage to recover damages for personal injuries or death sustained by an employee in the course and scope of the employment. (emphasis added). Because TLC § 406.033(a) refers only to whether an employer has Workers' Compensation insurance coverage, and not to whether an individual employee has been covered by his or her employer's Workers' Compensation policy, the operation of TLC § 406.033(e)'s bar does not apply to Cargillan employer who has Workers' Compensation coverageirrespective of Espinoza's decision to opt-out.