CASE NO. 502 CRD-1-86Workers’ Compensation Commission
JULY 15, 1988
The claimant was represented by Aaron L. Gersten, Esq., Gersten Gersten.
The respondents were represented by James Pomeranz, Esq. and Lucas Strunk, Esq., Pomeranz, Drayton Stabnick.
This Petition for Review from the August 7, 1986 Finding and Award of the Commissioner at Large acting for the First District was heard October 30, 1987 before a Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners Frank Verrilli and Michael S. Sherman.
FINDING AND AWARD
1-7. Paragraphs 1 through 7 of the trial Commissioner’s August 7, 1986 Finding and Award are affirmed and adopted as paragraphs 1 through 7 of this Division’s Finding and Award.
8. No deductions for social security or unemployment taxes were withheld from Claimant’s renumeration.
9. Claimant is found to be an employee.
WHEREFORE IT IS ORDERED AND AWARDED THAT Respondents pay Claimant all benefits to which she is or may become entitled under chapter 568, C.G.S.
OPINION
JOHN ARCUDI, Chairman.
Respondents’ sole issue on appeal from the August 7, 1986 Finding and Award is their contention that Claimant was an independent contractor and not an employee as found by the Commissioner at Large. They argue that the findings below do not support the legal conclusion of employee status. Respondents further claim error in the Commissioner’s failure to find that Claimant requested Respondents not withhold social security and unemployment compensation deductions from her wages.
As we have noted before, employee status is a matter determined by the control which one party may assert over another, Kaliszewski v. Weathermaster Alsco Corp., 148 Conn. 624
(1961); Ukers v. Brook, 372 CRD-7-85 (decided April 7, 1988); Chillington v. Spenard’s Roofing, 4 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 102, 389 CRD-7-85 (1987); Gadacy v. Bush, 4 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 1, 431 CRD-4-85 (1987). Though his findings are brief to the point of terseness, nonetheless the Commissioner did find the employer (1) instructed Claimant as to her work duties; (2) told her when to report to work; (3) furnished tools, equipment and supplies; (4) admitted her to the premises and (5) voluntarily raised her pay from $50.00 to $60.00 per day. These findings reasonably support the conclusion that the claimant was an employee of the respondent.
We have ruled the finding that no social security or unemployment dues were withheld from Claimant’s pay. But that is not sufficient to alter the ultimate conclusion of employee rather than independent contractor status. “The failure to withhold social security or income taxes may have been a violation of the applicable law but does not preclude a finding that the plaintiff was in fact an employee.” Kaliszewski, supra, at 630.
We therefore affirm the Commissioner below. Additionally, by virtue of the authority vested in the Compensation Review Division under Sec. 31-301c, C.G.S., we award Claimant interest on the amount of the award not paid during the pendency of this appeal to be computed from the date of the original award to the date of the final appeal decision at the rate of six per cent per annum.
Commissioners Frank Verrilli and Michael S. Sherman concur.