Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

Contracts exempting employers from operation of act

to accept compensation when his employer has already indicated his intention of embracing that doctrine then the employer of such employé shall have restored to him his common-law defenses. The whole subject, as it is worked out in this series of implied agreements, made necessary by the constitutional difficulties in the way of an obligatory compensation law, has produced a condition which is both anomalous and confusing.

Under the British Act it is held that an agreement with an employé who had been injured, containing terms different from those specified in the Act, will not be upheld. British & South American Steam Navigation Co. v. Neil (1910), 3 B. W. C. C. 413.

The term "contracting out" is frequently heard in some quarters in connection with compensation acts. It has a restricted meaning, however, and does not include the right generally to annul the Compensation Act by contract between employer and employé. The term merely refers to the right given under the statute of adopting some alternative scheme of compensation which will, in effect, be the same as that provided under the Act. In other words, the employer himself under certain conditions, or a number of employers co-operating, can provide a method of compensating his or their employés on a plan which may differ in detail from that provided in the statute, but which must be substantially the same in principle. Such plans must invariably have the approval of certain public officials before they become effective. Thus a scheme was certified under the British Workman's Compensation Act of 1897. Within six months, allowed for recertification under the Act of 1906, an infant who had contracted out of the Act met with an accident. The scale of compensation was not beneficial to the infant. It was held that the infant was not bound by the contract. Morter v. Great Eastern Ry. Co. (1908), 2 B. W. C. C. 480.

Arizona

ARTICLE C.-SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE VARIOUS STATUTES

ARIZONA 1

The "especially dangerous" employments covered by the compulsory portion of the Arizona Act are specified in § 67 below. Employers and employés in other occupations may elect to adopt the compensation principle. § 79.

There are no special classes of employés, such as domestic servants and casual employés, excepted from the terms of the Arizona Act. There would be no object in making such exceptions as all employés have the constitutional right in Arizona to elect, after the accident, whether they will demand compensation or damages. The provision in many of the acts, therefore, that if employers in specific employments fail to adopt the compensation principle they shall not be permitted to interpose the common-law defenses is unimportant in Arizona. While the common-law defenses are not entirely abrogated they are very greatly modified and the modification affects employers who come under the compensation feature of the statute as well as those who do not.

The following are the principal features of the statute:

L. 1912,

2d Ses.,

Art. 14, § 2.

"§ 66. Compulsory compensation shall be paid by his employer to any workman engaged in

1 In 1913 the State of Arizona codified its laws relating to employer and employé and re-enacted the workmen's compensation law as Chapter VII of that codification. The re-enactment was without substantial change in the old law, but such changes as were made are contained in the statute printed in the text. The original statute was cited as "Article 14, Section 1 Second Session, Laws of 1912, page 23." The re-enactment has new section numbers, beginning with Section 65, but in the body of the law frequent reference is made to the sections under the old section marks. This is very confusing and it has been necessary to insert the old section marks in the margin to understand the references in certain sections to provisions in other sections.

Arizona

any employment declared and determined as in the next section hereof (as provided in § 8, of Article XVIII of the State Constitution) to be especially dangerous, whether said employer be a person, firm, association, company, or corporation, if in the course of the employment of said employé personal injury thereto from any accident arising out of, and in the course of, such employment is caused in whole, or in part, or is contributed to, by a necessary risk or danger of such employment, or a necessary risk or danger inherent in the nature thereof, or by failure of such employer, or any of his or its officers, agents, or employé or employés, to exercise due care, or to comply with any law affecting such employment."

"§ 67. The employments hereby declared and determined to be especially dangerous (as provided in § 8, of Article XVIII of the State Constitution) within the meaning of this chapter are as follows:

"1. The operation of steam railroads, electrical railroads, street railroads, by locomotives, engines, trains, motors, or cars of any kind propelled by a steam, electricity, cable or other mechanical power, including the construction, use or repair of machinery, plants, tracks, switches, bridges, roadbeds, upon, over, and by which such railway business is operated.

"2. All work when making, using or necessitating dangerous proximity to gunpowder, blasting powder, dynamite, compressed air, or any other explosive.

"3. The erection or demolition of any bridge, building, or structure in which there is, or in which the plans and specifications require, iron or steel frame work.

"4. The operation of all elevators, elevating machinery or derricks or hoisting apparatus used within or on the outside of any bridge, building or other structure for conveying materials in connec

L. 1912, Art. 14, § 3.

2d Ses.,

L. 1912, 2d Ses.,

Art. 14, § 4.

L. 1912,

2d Ses.,

Art. 14, § 5.

L. 1912,

2d Ses.,

Art. 14, § 6.

Arizona

tion with the erection or demolition of such bridge, building or structure.

"5. All work on ladders or scaffolds of any kind elevated twenty (20) feet or more above the ground or floor beneath in the erection, construction, repair, painting or alteration of any building, bridge, structure or other work in which the same are used.

"6. All work of construction, operation, alteration or repair, where wires, cables, switchboards, or other apparatus or machinery are in use charged with electrical current.

"7. All work in the construction, alteration or repair of pole lines for telegraph, telephone or other purposes.

"8. All work in mines; and all work in quarries. "9. All work in the construction and repair of tunnels, sub-ways and viaducts.

"10. All work in mills, shops, works, yards, plants, and factories where steam, electricity, or any other mechanical power is used to operate machinery and appliances in and about such premises.

"§ 68. In case such employé or his personal representative shall refuse to settle for such compensation (as provided in § 8 of Article XVIII of the State Constitution), and chooses to retain the right to sue said employer (as provided in any law provided for in § 7, Article XVIII of the State Constitution) he may so refuse to settle and may retain said right.

"§ 69. It is hereby declared and determined to be contrary to public policy that any employer conducting any especially dangerous industry, through any of his or its officers, agents, or employé or employés, shall fail to exercise due care, or fail to comply with any law affecting such employment, in such manner as to endanger the lives and safety of employés thereof, without as

Arizona

suming the burden of the financial loss through disability entailed upon such employés, or their dependents, through such failure; and it is further declared and determined to be contrary to public policy that the burden of the financial loss to employés in such dangerous employments, or to their dependents, due to injuries to such employés received through such accidents as are hereinbefore mentioned shall be borne by said employés without due compensation paid to said employés, or their dependents, by the employer conducting such employment, owing to the inability of said employés to secure employment in said employments under a free contract as to the conditions under which they will work.

Art. 14, § 7.

"§ 70. The common-law doctrine of no liability L. 1912, without fault is hereby declared and determined 2d Ses., to be abrogated in Arizona as far as it shall be sought to be applied to the accidents hereinbefore mentioned.

§ 71. When, in the course of work in any of the employments described in the third section above, personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of such labor, service, or employment, is caused to or suffered by any workman engaged therein, by any risk or failure specified in the second section hereof, then such employer shall be liable to and must make and pay compensation to the workman injured, and his personal representative, when death ensues, for the benefit of the estate of the deceased, for such injury at the rates and in the manner hereinafter set out in this Chapter:

"PROVIDED, That the employer shall not be liable under this Chapter in respect of any injury which does not disable the workman for a period of at least two weeks after the date of the accident

This refers to § 67 of the Act of 1913. It was § 3 in the Act of 1912.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »