Faulkner v. Mayfield3/25/1988
00 Ariz. 327, 414 P. 2d 144.
This case can be distinguished from those two unreported cases. First, Faulkner was not a prisoner deprived of liberty or under the direction and control of a prison superintendent. Second, these two cases rely entirely on employee -employer principles, a traditional common-law master-servant analysis. The traditional employee is, of course, included in workers' compensation coverage, but the statute provides broader coverage than the common-law master-servant relationship.
Section 34, Article II of the Ohio Constitution provides:
"Welfare of employes .
"Laws may be passed fixing and regulating the hours of labor, establishing a minimum wage, and providing for the comfort, health, safety and general welfare of all employes ; and no other provision of the constitution shall impair or limit this power. (Adopted September 3, 1912.)"
In State v. Iden (1942), 71 Ohio App. 65, 25 O.O. 404, 47 N.E.2d 907, the court discussed that constitutional provision, and the scope of the legislature's power to carry it into effect:
"But we are of opinion that the people understood the term in the constitutional provision in a broader sense. It is significant that the word 'all' precedes the word employees.' Not just those who might be so designated and found in a negligence action. In fact, anyone who labors for another and is compensated by his employer for so doing is an employee and is in employment. The constitutional term 'employees' standing alone describes the individuals. The statutory term employment' rather describes the station or situation in which an 'employee' finds himself. Clearly the purpose of Section 34 of Article II was not to define the word 'employees' but to empower the Legislature to pass lawsthat would promote the general welfare of employees by improving their working conditions; in other words, their 'employment."' Id. at 72, 25 O.O. at 407, 47 N.E.2d at 910-911. R.C. 4123.01(A)(1)(a) reads:
"(A)(1) 'employee,' 'workman,' or 'operative' means:
"(a) Every person in the service of the state, or of any county, municipal corporation, township, or school district therein, including regular members of lawfully constituted police and fire departments of municipal corporations and townships, whether paid or volunteer, and wherever serving within the state or on temporary assignment outside thereof, and executive officers of boards of education, under any appointment or contract of hire, express or implied, oral or written, including any elected official of the state, or of any county, municipal corporation, or township, or members of boards of education[.] * * *"
The language in R.C. 4123.01 uses broad universal phrasing, such as " very person in the service of the state, or of any county * * *" and " very * * * firm * * *." "'Injury' includes any injury * * *." The exceptions to R.C. 4123.01(A) are quite narrow, excluding only ministers, Victory Baptist Temple, Inc. v. Indus. Comm. (1982), 2 Ohio App.3d 418, 2 OBR 510, 442 N.E.2d 819, and the officers of a family farm corporation, and even these employees may be covered if the employer elects to do so. The clear legislative intent is to make workers' compensation coverage broad enough to include the entire range of employment relations people might enter into. There are no specific statutory exclusions from participation in the fund for persons who are injured while working off a fine, nor has the issue presented in this case ever been considered in Ohio.
The variety of work people do is as various as people themselves. While the large majority of people work regularly scheduled jobs for regular pay,
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|