ORS 656.052
Prohibition against employment without coverage; proposed order declaring noncomplying employer; effect of failure to comply


(1)

No person shall engage as a subject employer unless and until the person has provided coverage pursuant to ORS 656.017 (Employer required to pay compensation and perform other duties) for subject workers the person employs.

(2)

Whenever the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services has reason to believe that any person has violated subsection (1) of this section, the director shall serve upon the person a proposed order declaring the person to be a noncomplying employer and containing the amount, if any, of civil penalty to be assessed pursuant to ORS 656.735 (Civil penalty for noncomplying employers) (1).

(3)

If any person fails to comply with ORS 656.017 (Employer required to pay compensation and perform other duties) after an order declaring the person to be a noncomplying employer has become final by operation of law or on appeal, the circuit court of the county in which the person resides or in which the person employs workers shall, upon the commencement of a suit by the director for that purpose, permanently enjoin the person from employing subject workers without complying with ORS 656.017 (Employer required to pay compensation and perform other duties). Upon the filing of such a suit, the court shall set a day for hearing and shall cause notice thereof to be served upon the noncomplying employer. The hearing shall be not less than five days from the service of the notice.

(4)

The court may award reasonable attorney fees to the director if the director prevails in an action under subsection (3) of this section. The court may award reasonable attorney fees to a defendant who prevails in an action under subsection (3) of this section if the court determines that the director had no objectively reasonable basis for asserting the claim or no reasonable basis for appealing an adverse decision of the trial court. [Amended by 1957 c.574 §2; 1965 c.285 §14; 1967 c.341 §4; 1973 c.447 §1; 1987 c.234 §1; 1990 c.2 §5; 1995 c.332 §6b; 1995 c.696 §43]

Law Review Citations

27 WLR 110 (1991)

§§ 656.001 to 656.794

Law Review Citations

55 OLR 432-445 (1976); 16 WLR 519 (1979); 22 WLR 559 (1986)

Chapter 656

Notes of Decisions

Party having affirmative of any issue must prove it by preponderance of evidence unless legislature fixes some different quantum of proof. Hutcheson v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 288 Or 51, 602 P2d 268 (1979)

Amendments to existing statutes and enactment of additional statutes by 1995 legislation generally apply to pending cases and to orders still appealable on June 7, 1995, effective date. Volk v. America West Airlines, 135 Or App 565, 899 P2d 746 (1995), Sup Ct review denied

Amendments to existing statutes and enactment of additional statutes by 1995 legislation do not extend or shorten procedural time limitations with regard to actions taken prior to June 7, 1995, effective date. Motel 6 v. McMasters, 135 Or App 583, 899 P2d 1212 (1995)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Benefit unavailability for inmates engaged in prison work programs, (1996) Vol 48, p 134

Law Review Citations

24 WLR 321, 341 (1988); 32 WLR 217 (1996)


Source
Last accessed
May. 15, 2020