Court Opinion

ID: 9562173
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:23:04.21461+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:14.494618
License: Public Domain

Thompson, C. J.,
dissenting:
When the bonds were written our law provided that “the claim of any employee of the contractor for wages shall be a preferred claim against any such bond * * 63 Stat. ch. 345, p. 695. The narrow issue presented is whether a contractor’s required contributions to the trustees of the union’s health, insurance and pension fund are “wages” within the statutory contemplation entitling the trustees to a preferred position in pressing claims against the bonds.
The only court opinion possessing relevance to the issue is United States v. Embassy Restaurant, 359 U.S. 29 (1959). In a split decision the United States Supreme Court ruled that such contributions were not entitled to priority in payment under the Bankruptcy Act as “wages . . . due to workmen.” Persuasive arguments on either side of the question are readily apparent, and are presented by the opposing opinions in Embassy.
I doubt that the legislature intended anything other than in-pocket monies due the worker when it wrote the priority statute. An assumed case will serve to point up the precise issue. Suppose that conflicting claims against the bond were to be pressed by laborers for “wages” on the one hand, and by trustees for “contributions” to the welfare fund, on the other. In such event, I would grant the laborers a preferred position on the ground that “wages” as used in the statute means in-pocket monies due the workers, and not the fringe benefits contracted for. This, because I think the legislative purpose was to prefer the laborers’ present right to compensation for work performed over their right to contingent benefits *250to later accrue. The statute should not receive a different construction simply because the issue is presented in a different context. For this reason I reject the notion that wages and welfare contributions are the same thing.
Respectfully, I dissent.