Notes of Decisions
Although members of cooperative performed services in return for patronage dividends, which are share of profit in proportion to amount of work performed, and although in absence of profits they might not receive any compensation, members received remuneration within meaning of this section, making cooperative liable for unemployment insurance contributions. Emp. Div. v. Surata Soy Foods, 63 Or App 221, 662 P2d 810 (1983)
Payments to proctor parents caring for difficult foster children in their homes were subject to payroll taxes for unemployment insurance. Youth Care Services v. Employment Division, 91 Or App 145, 754 P2d 25 (1988)
Where petitioner distributes appliances to retail stores but has no control over how sales are made and at what prices or whether spiff program will be implemented at particular retail establishment, service to petitioner is too indirect to constitute employment and petitioner is not subject to payroll taxes for unemployment insurance. North Pacific Supply Co., Inc. v. Emp. Div., 100 Or App 553, 787 P2d 495 (1990), Sup Ct review denied
Chapter 657
Notes of Decisions
An individual who performs services for remuneration is an employee, and person or organization for whom services are performed is an employer under terms of Employment Division Law even if remuneration is paid indirectly rather than directly unless employer shows that some statutory exclusion applies. Lectro Lift, Inc. v. Morgan, 14 Or App 316, 513 P2d 526 (1973)
Mere act of incorporating as professional corporation does not, by itself, create employer-employee relationship for purposes of this chapter. Peterson v. Employment Division, 82 Or App 371, 728 P2d 95 (1986)
Atty. Gen. Opinions
Determining employer of musicians group, (1972) Vol 35, p 1306
