2015 ORS 656.029¹
Obligation of person awarding contract to provide coverage for workers under contract
  • exceptions
  • effect of failure to provide coverage

(1) If a person awards a contract involving the performance of labor where such labor is a normal and customary part or process of the person’s trade or business, the person awarding the contract is responsible for providing workers’ compensation insurance coverage for all individuals, other than those exempt under ORS 656.027 (Who are subject workers), who perform labor under the contract unless the person to whom the contract is awarded provides such coverage for those individuals before labor under the contract commences. If an individual who performs labor under the contract incurs a compensable injury, and no workers’ compensation insurance coverage is provided for that individual by the person who is charged with the responsibility for providing such coverage before labor under the contract commences, that person shall be treated as a noncomplying employer and benefits shall be paid to the injured worker in the manner provided in this chapter for the payment of benefits to the worker of a noncomplying employer.

(2) If a person to whom the contract is awarded is exempt from coverage under ORS 656.027 (Who are subject workers), and that person engages individuals who are not exempt under ORS 656.027 (Who are subject workers) in the performance of the contract, that person shall provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage for all such individuals. If an individual who performs labor under the contract incurs a compensable injury, and no workers’ compensation insurance coverage is provided for that individual by the person to whom the contract is awarded, that person shall be treated as a noncomplying employer and benefits shall be paid to the injured worker in the manner provided in this chapter for the payment of benefits to the worker of a noncomplying employer.

(3) As used in this section:

(a) "Person" includes partnerships, joint ventures, associations, corporations, limited liability companies, governmental agencies and sole proprietorships.

(b) "Sole proprietorship" means a business entity or individual who performs labor without the assistance of others. [1979 c.864 §2; 1981 c.725 §1; 1981 c.854 §4; 1983 c.397 §1; 1983 c.579 §2a; 1985 c.706 §1; 1989 c.762 §5; 1995 c.93 §34; 1995 c.332 §6a]

Notes of Decisions

If require­ments of this sec­tion are met it is imma­te­ri­al whether there is actual employer-employee rela­tionship because rela­tionship is created by opera­tion of law. Love v. Northwest Explora­tion Co., 67 Or 413, 678 P2d 754 (1984); Kistner v. BLT Enterprises, 74 Or App 131, 700 P2d 1047 (1985)

Partnership can be subject worker under this sec­tion. EBI Companies v. Erzen, 73 Or App 256, 698 P2d 534 (1985), Sup Ct review denied; Kistner v. BLT Enterprises, 74 Or App 131, 700 P2d 1047 (1985)

For activities prior to October 4, 1989, registra­tion as proprietor of independent building business es­tab­lishes conclusive presump­tion per­son is independent contractor. HDG Enterprises v. Natl. Council on Comp. Ins., 121 Or App 513, 856 P2d 1037 (1993)

Where contract is awarded to sole proprietor, exemp­tion from coverage under ORS 656.027 (Who are subject workers) applies to proprietor's employees only if contract obligates proprietor to perform per­sonally as worker rather than in role as employer. K-Mart Corpora­tion v. Claussing, 162 Or App 558, 986 P2d 1185 (1999)

Require­ment that general contractor or subcontractor "provide" coverage means coverage must actually be supplied. Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. v. Sparks, 171 Or App 65, 14 P3d 624 (2000)

Exemp­tion granted to general contractor if subcontractor supplies coverage "before" work begins applies only if coverage supplied by subcontractor is still in force at time work commences. Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. v. Sparks, 171 Or App 65, 14 P3d 624 (2000)

Key aspects of "trade or business" are that ac­tivity is both regular and commercial in character. Sorenson v. LaTour, 217 Or App 373, 176 P3d 395 (2007)

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)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 656—Workers' Compensation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors656.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 656, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano656.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.