FILED: March 19, 2009
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
NATIONAL MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS OF OREGON, INC.,
Argued and submitted on July 03, 2008.
John Glowney argued the cause for petitioner.� On the brief were P.K. Runkles-Pearson and Stoel Rives LLP.
Richard Wasserman waived appearance for respondent.
Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Sercombe, Judge.
Petitioner seeks judicial review of an order of the Employment Department that denied petitioner relief from certain unemployment insurance charges under ORS 657.471.� Petitioner argues that it should have been relieved of the charges because its franchisees are not petitioner's "employees" for purposes of ORS chapter 657.� Petitioner submits that "this Court already is considering whether [petitioner's] franchisees are employees in another pending case [involving the same parties], (A134773)" and "the result in this case should follow this Court's decision in that matter."� In Employment Dept. v. National Maintenance Contractors ___ Or App ___, ___ P3d ___ (March 19, 2009), we concluded that petitioner's franchisees provided to petitioner for remuneration and were therefore within the legislature's definition of employment in ORS 657.030.� For that reason, we remanded the order for the administrative law judge to consider whether the franchisees were independent contractors.� Id. at ___ (slip op at 22).�
Given our remand in case A134773, petitioner is not, at this time, entitled to relief of unemployment insurance charges.� Accordingly, we affirm.