Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1981 )


Menu:
  •    The Attorney                 General of Texas
    September 23. 1981
    Honorable Buck Florence, Chairman           Opinion No. ``-369
    House of Representatives
    Committee on Judicial Affairs               Re: Whether      sick leave  and
    P. 0. Box 2910                              vacation benefits are wage con-
    Austin, Texas 78769                         tinuation   programs  under  the
    Crime Victims Compensation Act
    Dear Representative     Florence:
    You ask whether sick leave and vacation benefits are “wage continua-
    tion prcgramsv within section 3(3)(p) of article 8309-1, V.T.C.S., the Crime
    Victims Compensation Act, and whether sick leave and vacation benefits
    which are used are compensable under section 3(7)(ARiD.
    Article 8309-l affords a means of indemnifying crime victims and
    individuals who suffer personal injury or death while attemptiq  to prevent
    crimes. Section 2. Eligibility for awards of compensation is determined by
    the Industrial Accident Board in accordance with the criteria prescribed
    therein. Section 6 provides that:
    (b) The board shall establish that ~BSa direct result
    of criminally injurious conduct the victim suffered
    physical injury or death that resulted in a pecuniary
    loss which the victim is unable to recoup without
    suffering financial stress and for whmh he or she IS
    not compensated from any collateral source.
    (c) The board shall deny the application   if:
    . . .
    (3) the claimant will not suffer financial stress as
    a result of the pecuniary loss arising out of criminally
    injurious conduct. . . . (Emphasis added).
    Section 3 provides that:
    (3) “Collateral source” means a source of benefits
    or advantages for pecuniary loss awardable other than
    under this Act which the victim has received, or
    which is readily available to him or her from:
    . . .
    p. 1235
    Honorable Buck Florence       - Psge Two     (MU-369)
    (P) *rage continuation   programs of any employer;
    . . .
    (6) ‘Financial stress’ means financial hardship experienced by
    a claimant as a result of pecuniary loss from criminally
    injurious conduct. . . . A claimant suffers financial stress only
    if he or she cannot maintain his or her customary level of
    health, safety, and education for himself or herself and his or
    her dependents without undue financial hardship. In making its
    finding, the board shall consider all relevant factors, including:
    . . .
    ,d(D)       the elm‘mant’s income and potential    earning capacity;
    (E) the claimant’s resources.       (Emphasis added).
    When the act is considered as a whole, we think it is clear that the legislature
    intended that it would be used only as a last resort to indemnify victims of crime for
    certain losses resulting from criminally injurious conduct. In order to be eligible for
    compensation,’ a claimant must demonstrate (1) that he has suffered an injury which
    results in a pecuniary loss; (2) that he is unable to recoup that loss without suffering
    financial stress; and (3) that he will not bs reimbursed for the loss from some
    collateral source. Each condition must be satisfied.
    Sick leave and vacation benefits may or may not be the fruits of a “wage
    continuation program,” depending upon the particular leave program .in question. See.
    e.~&, New Mexico v. Weinberger, 
    517 F.2d 989
    00th Cir. 1975),cert denied, 
    423 U.S. 1051
    (1976); Attorney General Opinion H-1303 (19781 In our opinion, however, it is
    unnecessary to determine whether such benefits are “wage continuation programs”
    within section 3(3)(F) of article 8309-1, because whether they may be properly
    described as such in a particular case will have no bearing on whether they are to be
    taken into consideration by the Industrial Accident Board in deciding whether to award
    compensation.    The board must determine, among other things, whether a claimant will
    suffer financial stress as a result of the pecuniary loss arising out of the criminally
    injurious conduct. If he will suffer no such stress, he is not eligible for compensation.
    V.T.C.S. art. 8309-1, S6(c)(3). In making this determination, the board must take into
    account all of the resources at the person’s command, V.T.C.S. art. 8309-1, S3(6l(E),
    which resources will obviously include any accrued vacation and sick leave due him.
    The restricted list of “collateral sources” found in the statute signifies those sources to
    which the state will be subrogated if compensation is awarded.          It is clearly not an
    exhaustive list of sources which the board must consider in deciding whether, and to
    what extent, to make an award. V.T.C.S. art 8309-1, SS6(c)(3), U(a).
    We therefore conclude that sick leave and vacation benefits available to a
    claimant who is the victim of criminally injurious conduct are to be taken into account
    D. 1236
    Honorable Buck Florence    - Page Three     (MW-369)
    by the Industrial Accident Board in determining whether the claimant can recoup his
    losses without suffering financial stress, regardless of whether said benefits may
    technically be described as a “wage continuation program.” If the claimant can do so,
    he is not eligible for compensation under article 8309-l.
    You next ask whether sick leave and vacation benefits          which are used are
    compensable under section 3(7)(A)(B). Section 3(7) provides that:
    ‘Pecuniary loss’ means the amount of expense reasonably and
    necessarily incurred:
    (A) regarding personal injury for:
    . ..
    (ii) actual loss of past earn” s and anticipated loss of
    future earnings because +o a dmability resulting from the
    personal injury at a rate not to exceed $150 per week.
    (Emphasis added).
    We assume your question involves an employee who uses sick leave and/ or vacation
    leave accrued prior to the time of his injury to cover all or a portion of the period of
    time he is absent from work because of an injury resulting from criminally injurious
    conduct.
    In order for used sick leave and vacation leave to be compensable under section
    3(7)(A)(B), it would have to constitute lost past earnings within the meaning of that
    provision at the time the board makes its award. We do not believe it does. In our
    opinion, earnings denote wages and similar forms of compensation which one receives
    in return for services rendered.      Lost past earnings, as used in the statute, denote
    compensation to which the victim, except for the injury, would have become entitled
    after the injury but prior to the award of compensation.       The accrued sick leave to
    which you refer represents earnings to which the victim had already become entitled
    before the injury occurred, and which he used to avoid suffering a loss that otherwise
    constitute “past earnings” for compensation purposes. We therefore answer your
    second question in the negative.
    SUMMARY
    Sick leave and vacation benefits which are available to an
    employee who is the victim of criminally injurious conduct are
    to ba taken into account by the Industrial Accident Board in
    determining whether the employee can recoup a pecuniary loss
    without suffering financial stress, regardless of whether they
    may technically be “wage continuation programs” within section
    p. 1237
    Honorable Buck Florence   - Page Four    (NW-369)
    3(3w.      Used sick leave and vacation    benefits   are   not
    compensable under section 3(73@)(iih
    l%pYtnd*
    MARK      WHITE
    Attorney General of Texas
    JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.
    First Assistant Attorney General
    RICHARD E. GRAY III
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    Prepared by Jon Bible
    AssistantAttorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMlTTEE
    Swan L. Garrison, Chairman
    Jon Bible
    Rick Gilpin
    Bruce Youngblood
    p. 1238
    

Document Info

Docket Number: MW-369

Judges: Mark White

Filed Date: 7/2/1981

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017