Court Opinion

ID: 9552432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:10:30.7262+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:26:24.730845
License: Public Domain

TANZER, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the majority opinion, but offer some additional comments made pertinent by the dissent— somewhat in the nature of a rebuttal opinion, perhaps.
The first argument of the dissent is addressed to a policy issue: whether janitors of churches and church-related enterprises are entitled to the same benefits as janitors employed by others. The legislature has resolved the issue by saying that they are not. The fact that we may not be impressed with the wisdom of such a statutory exception does not mean that we should construe it away. 1
1 also concur with the majority as it upholds the administrative decision to look to the fact of control. The legal right to control, advanced by the dissent as the proper test, is one form of actual control. Actual control is the more realistic test for the application of the statutory policy than the technical authority arising from corporate form which, as often as not, is designed to mask reality rather than to reflect it.
*[206]Finally, the dissent argues that a de facto test will be hard to apply. Perhaps, but agencies make tough factual judgments every day and we regularly uphold them if they are supported by substantial evidence. Difficulty of fact-finding is not a reason to construe a statute into a different interpretation.
For all these reasons, I concur.

My concurrence on this issue is limited to the statutory issue and I leave the constitutional issue for resolution when properly raised.