midpage

Clabo v. Bor-Son Construction Co.Clabo v. Bor-Son Construction Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Feb 21, 1992
C1-91-2044
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Coyne
COYNE, Justice.

Certiorari was granted to review a decision of the workers’ compensation court of appeals affirming the calculation of the weekly wage of a construction worker.

The employee ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍is a bricklayer in the construction industry. While employed by Bor-Son Construction Company, he sustained a compensable injury for which he received compensation first for temporary total disability and later for temporary partial disability. Within 90 days after he returned to work full-time, he was laid off for lack of work and ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍received monitoring period compensation until he found a job with another employer. The compensation judge calculated employee’s weekly wage in accordance with the formula for the construction industry instead of the 26-week formula for irregular wages, the method used by the employer/insurer when paying benefits. Minn.Stat. § 176.011, subd. 3 (1990). On appeal, the ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍WCCA affirmed under Berry v. Walker Roofing Co., 473 N.W.2d 312 (Minn.1991).

The employer/insurer contends the construction industry provision violates the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions. We think not. Here, there is a rational distinction between part-time or irregular employment and the construction industry in which full-time employment is affected by seasonal ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍conditions. Providing a simple method for computing the wage basis in the construction industry as full-time employment, rather than averaging the wages over one-half the year is rational. It would seem the employer/insurer’s challenge to the construction industry provision is more appropriately directed to the legislature for debate and deliberation. See Moes v. ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‍City of St. Paul, 402 N.W.2d 520, 525 (Minn.1987).

Affirmed.

The employee is awarded $400 in attorney fees.

YETKA, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Case Details

Case Name: Clabo v. Bor-Son Construction Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Minnesota
Date Published: Feb 21, 1992
Citations: 481 N.W.2d 47; 1992 WL 28949; 1992 Minn. LEXIS 47; C1-91-2044
Docket Number: C1-91-2044
Court Abbreviation: Minn.
Log In