Texas Attorney General Opinion: LO93-111 Page: 2 of 3
This text is part of the collection entitled: Texas Attorney General Opinions and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Mr. David Myers - Page 2
control the progress, details, and methods of operations of the
employee's work. Newspapers, Inc. v. Love, 380 S.W.2d 582,
585-90 (Tex. 1964). ... The employer must control not merely the
end sought to be accomplished, but also the means and details of its
accomplishment as well. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Ray, 262 S.W.2d 801,
803 (Tex. Civ. App.-Eastland 1953, writ refd). Examples of the
type of control normally exercised by an employer include when and
where to begin and stop work, the regularity of hours, the amount of
time spent on particular aspects of the work, the tools and appliances
used to perform the work, and the physical method or manner of
accomplishing the end result. See United States Fidelity and Guar.
Co. v. Goodson, 568 S.W.2d 443, 447 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana
1978, writ refd n.r.e.). [Citation omitted.]
Thompson v. Travelers Indem. Co. of R. ., 789 S.W.2d 277, 278-79 (Tex. 1990).
Courts apply this test to distinguish between employees and independent contractors in the
context of disputes under both the common law and workers' compensation statutes. See
id. at 278 (citing Elder v. Aetna Casual~y & Sur. Co., 149 Tex. 620, 623, 236 S.W.2d
611, 613 (1951)).
The unemployment compensation statutes define the term "employment" broadly
to include any service performed for wages under any contract of hire, written or oral,
provided that any services performed by an individual for wages shall
be deemed to be employment subject to this Act unless and until it is
shown to the satisfaction of the [Texas Employment] Commission
that such individual has been and will continue to be free from
control or direction over the performance of such services both under
his contract of service and in fact.
V.T.C.S. art. 5221b-17(gXl). In determining whether a worker is an employee or an
independent contractor for purposes of the unemployment compensation laws, courts
consider factors similar to those considered under the common-law test. See Barnett v.
Texas Employment Comm'n, 510 S.W.2d 361, 363 (Tex. Civ. App.-Austin 1974, writ
refd n.r.e.) (noting that statutory standard for liability under the Unemployment
Compensation Act is similar to common-law test).
Clearly, the determination whether an interpreter is an employee or an independent
contractor is fact-based and depends upon each interpreter's contractual relationship with
the council for which he or she performs interpreter services. You have not provided us
with suficient information about the contractual relationships between the councils and
the interpreters they hire. Furthermore, even if you had provided us with more
information about these contractual relationships, it is likely that such relationships vary
from council to council. Indeed, such differences may account for the differing opinions
to which you refer. This office cannot resolve questions of fact in the opinion process,
see, e.g., Attorney General Opinions DM-98 (1992) at 3; H-56 (1973), nor does this(LO-93-111)
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: LO93-111, text, December 7, 1993; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth276383/m1/2/?q=%22~1~1~1%22~1&rotate=0: accessed July 16, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.