Claim of Kemp v. City of HornellClaim of Kemp v. City of Hornell
Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed October 24, 1996, which ruled that Steuben County and the City of Hornell were equally liable for workers’ compensation benefits paid to claimant.
Claimant, a recipient of public assistance provided by the Steuben County Department of Social Services (hereinafter the County), sustained an injury to his arm while participating in a workfare program sponsored by the County. As a participant in the program, claimant received public assistance benefits instead of wages, reimbursement for work-related expenses and a lunch allowance from the County. The injury occurred while claimant was working on a broken jackhammer at the City of Hornell’s Department of Public Works garage. Claimant was found eligible to receive workers’ compensation benefits as a result of his injury. Subsequently, a dispute arose between the County and the City as to who would be responsible for paying claimant’s benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the County was claimant’s general employer and the City was his special employer, and that liability for the claim would be apportioned equally between them. This appeal by the City and its workers’ compensation carrier ensued.
We affirm. It is beyond cavil that a worker “who is in the general employ of one party may be in the special employ of another even where the former is responsible for the employee’s
While the City correctly notes the similarities between the instant case and Matter of Quick v Steuben County Self-Ins. Plan (
We reject the City’s assertion that the County, in a 1987 letter, acknowledged its role as the employer of all workfare workers, as that letter specifically excluded “co-employment situations”. Even if the County had agreed to provide workers’ compensation coverage for workfare participants, a different result should not be required (see, Matter of Pizzatola v Ulster County Dept. of Social Servs.,
Given the circumstances of this case, which can be distinguished from the situation in Matter of Quick (supra) (see, Matter of Hughes v Steuben County Self-Ins. Plan,
Mercure, J. P., White, Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.