Meyers v. SAIF

Under ORS 656.005(30), a "'worker' means any person who engages to furnish services for a remuneration, subject to the direction and control of an employer[.]"

Claimant sought review of an order by the Workers' Compensation Board that affirmed SAIF's denial of her claim of an injury suffered while on the way to an "orientation" before beginning paid training.  Claimant assigned error to the administrative law judge's holding that she was not a "subject worker" entitled to coverage under Workers' Compensation Law.  Claimant argued that she was a worker in providing temporary services in the form of the paid training, and that by showing up for the requisite pre-training orientation she had accepted the offer to work.  SAIF responded that Claimant was not a "worker" because she had not been engaged to furnish services for remuneration at the time of her injury.  Under ORS 656.005(30), a "'worker' means any person who engages to furnish services for a remuneration, subject to the direction and control of an employer[.]"  The Court held that Claimant arrived ready, willing, and able to attend the paid training, and but for her injury would have completed the orientation, therefore Claimant was a "worker" within the meaning of ORS 656.005(30).  Reversed and Remanded.