Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 440.21
CopyCited 107 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
purpose of section
440.205 adjudications. Section
440.021, Florida Statutes (1979), specifically exempts
CopyCited 75 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 445, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1242, 1992 WL 158194
...Mandico alleged that Taos and its employee had no immunity under section
440.11(1), Florida Statutes (1983), [1] because he was an independent contractor from whose wages Taos had "unilaterally extracted" the cost of the premium for worker's compensation insurance in violation of section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1983)....
...or the workers' compensation policy from payments due the excluded individual. Cf. id. (policy secured the benefits of Workers' Compensation Law where policy was procured with funds deducted from independent contractor's commission). It is true that section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1983), specifically provides that any agreement by an employee to pay any portion of the premium for workers' compensation insurance paid by the employer is invalid and any employer who makes a deduction for such...
...eanor. See Barragan v. City of Miami,
545 So.2d 252 (Fla. 1989). However, as noted above, an independent contractor is specifically excluded from the definition of "employee" as used in chapter 440. §
440.02(11)(d)1. Therefore, we conclude that the section
440.21 prohibition does not apply to such agreements by an independent contractor....
CopyCited 39 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1989 WL 38852
...In both cases, the First District Court of Appeal certified the following question as one of great public importance: [*] DOES THE EMPLOYER'S REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S PENSION BENEFITS, PURSUANT TO CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY'S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO AWARD COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO CLAIMANT "AT HIS COMBINED MAXIMUM MONTHLY WAGE"? The facts of these cases are very similar....
...After all, the city is responsible for the payment of both workers' compensation and pension benefits regardless of the funds from which these monies are withdrawn, and the city has strenuously litigated this case on behalf of its pension fund throughout these proceedings. Thus, we will decide these cases on their merits. Section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), an integral part of the workers' compensation law, states: 440.21 Invalid agreements; penalty....
...The definition of "employer" in section
440.02(12), Florida Statutes (1987), includes all political subdivisions of the state. Section
440.10, Florida Statutes (1987), requires every employer coming within the provisions of the workers' compensation law to provide the compensation set forth therein. Under state law, section
440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers' compensation benefits from an employee's pension benefits....
...The decision of the district court of appeal should be approved and the certified question answered in the negative. The claimants' workers' compensation benefits are not, and have not been, reduced in the slightest; the claimants are not contributing to their workers' compensation benefits contrary to section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987)....
...nsation benefits are paid and deducted from what the disability payments would have been had the disability been nonjob-related. This contribution is to the pension fund and not to benefits required under chapter 440, Florida Statutes, which is what section 440.21 prohibits. I cannot see how such a contractual agreement can be construed to be in violation of section 440.21....
...sation benefits cannot be reduced by any benefit to which the claimant is contractually entitled independent of workers' compensation. Jewel Tea has, or should have, no significance to the issue at hand. The majority opinion inexplicably states that section 440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers' compensation from an employee's pension benefits....
...ion of the statute. NOTES [*] City of Miami v. Barragan,
517 So.2d 99, 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Giordano v. City of Miami,
526 So.2d 737, 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Our jurisdiction is predicated on article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution. [*]
440.21 Invalid agreements; penalty....
CopyCited 32 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
Report) at 195. [3] Compare, for example, Section
440.021's exemption of workers' compensation adjudications
CopyCited 25 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 895, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 2039, 2000 WL 1535366
...nefits by taking an additional offset based on Grice because "if workers' compensation benefits are reduced based on disability pension benefits claimant received, and to which claimant contributed, such reduction in compensation may be violative of section 440.21." Id....
...1989), a case that he claims applies to situations where the employee has contributed to the collateral benefits. Indeed, in this case, unlike in Grice, Lombardi contributed to the pension plan that produced his disability retirement pension benefits. [12] This distinguishing factor requires us to consider the effect of section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1993): No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providing compensa...
...ch was part of his pension and employment contract, [13] but the City reduced the amount of Barragan's disability benefits by the amount of his workers' compensation benefits. See Id. at 253. On review, this Court determined that "[u]nder state law, section 440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers' compensation benefits from an employee's pension benefits." Id....
...As explained above, the disability benefits came from a fund to which Lombardi contributed. The First District recognized that to allow workers' compensation benefits to be reduced based on disability pension benefits to which an employee contributes might violate section 440.21, the same statute implicated in Barragan....
...s control that could be reduced were workers' compensation benefits, since the state of Florida paid the disability retirement and the federal government paid the social security disability." Lombardi,
738 So.2d at 497. Lastly, and most importantly, section
440.21 was not implicated in Grice, and therefore, in that case we could not have addressed the interplay between section
440.21(1) and section
440.20(15). Section
440.21(1) prohibits an employee from contributing to his or her workers' compensation benefits. [16] Accordingly, we hold that where the "pension plan is funded at least in part with employees' contributions, decreasing workers' compensation benefits on account of pension benefits runs afoul of section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1993)." Lombardi,
738 So.2d at 498....
...benefits are primary. Our holding should not be read to mean that in all other cases the workers' compensation fund automatically receives the benefit of the offset; rather, we hold only that where the fund is employee-contributory, it would violate section 440.21 for workers' compensation benefits to be reduced....
...enefits. Any payment by the employer over and above compensation paid or awarded and medical benefits, pursuant to subsection (14), shall be considered a gratuity. [12] In Grice, the state retirement plan was employee noncontributory, and therefore, section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993), did not apply....
...FRS members are contractually entitled to FRS benefits independent of receipt of workers' compensation benefits. Their benefits should not, therefore, be used to effect an offset." Because this case does not involve state disability retirement benefits, and because we reach our conclusion based on our interpretation of section 440.21, we do not reach the issue here. [16] Lombardi contends that section 440.21 is similar to 29 U.S.C....
...ployers from making payments from employee trust funds to satisfy their own obligations to pay workers' compensation benefits. He argues that public and private employees should not be treated differently in this regard and thus this construction of section 440.21 is consistent with federal law that is applicable to private employees....
...Kresge Co.,
305 So.2d 191 (Fla.1974) (sick leave benefits); Domutz v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.,
339 So.2d 636 (Fla.1976) (pension benefits). Although in Jewel Tea the employee contributed to the benefits, in Barragan we cited Domutz for the proposition that section
440.21 was applicable regardless of whether the employee contributed to the funding of these benefits....
CopyCited 22 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 234, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 596, 1997 WL 214014
...We disagree and conclude that the county may offset Grice's workers' compensation benefits to the extent that the total of his workers' compensation, disability retirement, and social security disability benefits exceed his average weekly wage. In Barragan v. City of Miami,
545 So.2d 252 (Fla.1989), this Court observed that section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1985), [1] precludes offsets for collateral benefits until an injured worker has received 100% of his average weekly wage in combined benefits, regardless of whether the collateral benefits were funded by the employer alone or in part by employee contributions....
...Accordingly, we answer the certified question in the affirmative, quash the decision of the district court, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] 440.21 Invalid agreements; penalty. (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providing compensati...
CopyCited 20 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...rkmen's compensation injury benefits, or are sick leave benefits a part of the fringe benefits of the injured employee's employment contract. The Judge of Industrial Claims determined no credit was allowable. We agree to the extent indicated herein. Section 440.21, Florida Statutes, provides that: "No agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under this chapter shall be valid." This statutory language would appear to preclude any implication that fringe benefit group insurance...
...ion act as well as through the private insurance policy), unilaterally financed in both instances by the employer. Since the law never contemplated the unjust enrichment of a claimant, I believe that such a credit to the employer is not repugnant to Section 440.21, Florida Statutes, which invalidates any agreement by an employee to share the employer's cost of compensation....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...The Judge and Commission held the matter outside their jurisdiction. The result gives the employer a credit against its workmen's compensation liability for payments made under a group insurance plan to which claimant contributed. This is contrary to Florida Statute § 440.21, F.S.A., which provides in part as follows: "No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providi...
...the pay of any employee entitled to the benefits of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars." Jewel Tea, the employer, contends that Florida Statute § 440.21, F.S.A....
...Claimant is entitled to workmen's compensation in addition to any benefits under an insurance plan to which he contributed. Determination of a claimant's right to compensation under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., requires consideration of Florida Statute § 440.21, F.S.A., and is within the jurisdiction of the Commission....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 167318
...City of Miami , contains no express declaration that it is to operate prospectively only. In urging that the exception to the rule ought to apply, the City does not take into account the rationale underlying the Barragan decision, i.e., that pursuant to section 440.21, Florida Statutes, an employer is prohibited from deducting workers' compensation benefits from an employee's pension benefits....
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1829
....e. whether the contractual agreement by Knight to accept a pension benefit reduced by any workers' compensation to which he might be simultaneously entitled is an "agreement by an employee to waive his right to workers' compensation", invalid under Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 6357, 1988 WL 39120
...In the Justice decision, the Florida Supreme Court found the truck driver to be an employee of, rather than an independent contractor for, a trucking company, notwithstanding the fact that deductions from his pay were made for workers’ compensation coverage.
272 So.2d at 133 . Although Fla.Stat.Ann. §
440.21 invalidates any agreement by an employee to pay any portion of his workers’ compensation premium, Tri-State was unaware of Vanzandt’s deduction of workers’ compensation premiums from Judy’s pay....
...Because we have denied appellant’s requested relief, we find it unnecessary to discuss appellee’s cross-appeal. 1 . Tri-State owned the trailers which were pulled by both its company drivers and its contractor’s drivers. 2 . Tri-State was the only motor carrier to whom Vanzandt leased tractor rigs. 3 . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 440.21 provides in part: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providing compensation or medi...
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
agency opinion and final agency action; however, §
440.021 establishes that deputy commissioners are exempt
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 322, 2013 WL 2096257, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1000
benefits in contradiction to the provisions of section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1987). Because the workers’
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...ture benefits to be paid. It was stipulated that compensation in the amount of $28,391.19 had been paid at the time of the hearing. Additionally, the final judgment denied Mincey's motion to strike and to deny claim of lien based upon a violation of section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1981)....
...incey who claims and accepts compensation benefits is precluded by Sec.
440.39(2), Fla. Stat. (1981) from asserting his present contention that the carrier is not entitled to a lien on his third-party recovery because of an alleged violation of Sec.
440.21, Fla. Stat. (1981). NOTES [1] Section
440.21 states, in relevant part: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providing compens...
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 WL 88870
such
120.57 proceedings since 1977, in that Section
440.021, Florida Statutes, expressly exempts workers'
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1994 WL 61399
...ees, and the awards were affirmed on appeal. As noted above, this Court held in Barragan that the 1973 repeal of section
440.09(4), Florida Statutes (1971), had the effect of invalidating the City ordinance. We rejected the ordinance as contravening section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), which prohibits the City from deducting from the employee's income a contribution to pay workers' compensation benefits....
...NOTES [1] Section
440.09(4) provided that any workers' compensation benefits payable to injured public employees should be reduced by the amount of pension benefits that were also payable. Private employers were prohibited from taking offsets for workers' compensation benefits by section
440.21, which states: (1) No agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by such employer for the purpose of providing compensation or me...
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3536, 1992 WL 59200
...1st DCA 1991), we hold that Barragan has retroactive application to July 1, 1973. Our reading of Barragan convinces us that the supreme court did not intend to excuse retroactive application of its decision. Its rejection of the City of Miami ordinance as contravening section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1987), the state law which prohibits the city from collecting from the employee a contribution to a fund to pay workers' compensation benefits, is interpreted by this court to mean that the ordinance was void effecti...
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18597
...ent between the Union and Florida Public Utilities represents a scheme through which the employee was compelled to contribute to his workers' compensation premium." Presumably, this was a finding that the procedures used in this case did not violate Section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1979)....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19145
unavailable in chapter 440 appeals to this Court. Section
440.021, Florida Statutes (1981), exempts proceedings
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...itutions. Under his first point, plaintiff argues that the ordinance in effect forces a police officer who is on pension and is a workmen's compensation claimant involuntarily to waive his rights to the workmen's compensation law in contravention of Section
440.21(2), Florida Statutes, which provides: "(2) No agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under this chapter shall be valid." The trial court reasoned that if the former state statute (Section
440.09(4) Laws of Florida...
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 9996, 1992 WL 222006
...In order to impose the penalty here, we must be able to say, clearly, that the pay-back of retirement benefits was "compensation." But this is not at all clear. Barragan, [4] citing Jewel Tea, [5] holds that the JCC has jurisdiction of claims to recover offsets taken in violation of section 440.21, regardless of whether the offsets are stated to be against workers' compensation benefits or against retirement or other benefits....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2316
...It cannot be seriously suggested that the parties could enter into a labor contract in which they privately agree that the workers' compensation act would be inapplicable. Any agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under chapter 440 is declared invalid by statute. § 440.21, Fla....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9507, 1999 WL 496244
...He was receiving a pension from the Illinois State Retirement Fund in the amount of $1,150 per month, and the employment at Bio Lab supplemented his retirement income. The E/C did not, however, consider the pension payments in the offset calculation. [2] See also section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), which prohibits "[a]ny agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by the employer for the purpo...
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 59, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11727, 1987 WL 3186
...9.030(a)(2)(A)(v) we certify the following question as one of great public importance: DOES THE EMPLOYER'S REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S PENSION BENEFITS, PURSUANT TO CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY'S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO AWARD COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO CLAIMANT "AT HIS COMBINED MAXIMUM MONTHLY WAGE"? NIMMONS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...y from their salaries. The court said that as a result of the JIC's holding that he lacked jurisdiction, the employer obtained credit against its worker's compensation liability for payments made under the group plan, such a result being contrary to Section 440.21 which makes invalid any contribution by an employee to a worker's compensation fund....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1997 WL 178842
...BARFIELD, C.J., and ERVIN, J., concur. NOTES [1] Section
440.15(11), Florida Statutes (1991), was renumbered as section
440.15(12), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). Ch. 93-415, § 20, at 131, Laws of Fla. The parties' stipulation refers to section
440.15(12). [2] Claimant has not invoked section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1991), which confers broad powers on judges of compensation claims to redress employers' misapplication of other employee entitlements in (legally ineffective) efforts to discharge workers' compensation obligations....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 280805
...pril 27, 1989. Claimant returned to work on December 1, 1989, and after working for Delta for two consecutive weeks, she was given a new allotment of vacation and sick days retroactive to September 28, 1989, to use for the 1989-1990 employment year. Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes (1987) On appeal, claimant contends that the option given to her to use her sick leave and vacation leave in lieu of payment of workers' compensation benefits, constituted an improper agreement to waive her right to compensation contrary to section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes (1987). This statute provides that "no agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under this chapter shall be valid." § 440.21(2), Fla....
...Section
440.09(1), Florida Statutes (1987), provides that compensation shall be paid, except for the situations enumerated in that section, none of which are applicable here. As recently recognized in Williams v. City of Fort Walton Beach,
691 So.2d 580, 581, n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), section
440.21 exists "to redress employers' misapplication of other employee entitlements in (legally ineffective) efforts to discharge workers' compensation obligations." See also Barragan v....
...fered her an illusory choice. The claimant could elect to receive her regular compensation or an amount less than one-half of her regular pay in workers' compensation benefits. [2] This is no real option. Accordingly, we agree with the claimant that section 440.21(2) was violated in this case....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1676
...ddition to an employee's group insurance benefits. Jewel Tea Co., Inc. v. Florida Industrial Commission,
235 So.2d 289, 291 (Fla. 1970) (Determination of claimant's rights to compensation under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes requires consideration of §
440.21 Florida Statutes [1] and is within the jurisdiction of the deputy commissioners.) See also Chancey v....
...ve all that he is due, by limiting compensation offsets to amounts not charged against contract sick leave time. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion. BOOTH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 440.21 Florida Statutes (1985) provides: 440.21 Invalid agreements; penalty....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 502, 1992 WL 10883
...ty relied upon its ordinance to continue taking the offsets for accidents occurring subsequent to July 1, 1973. However, in Barragan, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that Miami's city ordinance was preempted by the workers' compensation law and that section 440.21, Florida *546 Statutes, which provides that no agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation shall be valid, prohibited the City from deducting workers' compensation benefits....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 597204
...1989). ZEHMER, C.J., and ERVIN, JOANOS, BARFIELD, ALLEN, WOLF, KAHN, WEBSTER, MICKLE, DAVIS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur. BENTON, J., dissents with opinion in which BOOTH, MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur. BENTON, J., dissenting. On the authority of section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993), as construed in Barragan, [1] Mr....
...The case should be remanded [11] to provide the judge of compensation claims an opportunity to decide the correct amount of the reduction authorized by Barragan, if any. On remand, the judge of compensation claims should order the City to pay Mr. Champlovier the full benefits to which he is entitled under section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...The court concluded that the prior decree had been predicated on a different cause of action ("indignities to the person"). Here the two causes of action are even more distinct. The original claim was under section
440.15, Florida Statutes, while the claim that gave rise to the present appeal arises under section
440.21, Florida Statutes....
...A stipulation may however, be binding in a subsequent action between the parties if the parties have manifested an intention to that effect. Id. at cmt. e. These parties manifested no intention to be bound for purposes of post- Barragan claims under section 440.21, Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 569559
...disability pension by the amount of workers' compensation paid. Thus, it appears that, as in Grice, workers' compensation benefits are the only funds which may be reduced by the E/SA once total benefits exceed AWW. Nevertheless, we are cognizant of section 440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1993), which prohibits "[a]ny agreement by an employee ......
...cal services and supplies as required by this chapter." Thus, if workers' compensation benefits are reduced based on disability pension benefits claimant received, and to which claimant contributed, such reduction in compensation may be violative of section 440.21....
...If such a provision exists, we direct the E/SA to pay full workers' compensation benefits and to apply any offset arising from the AWW cap, as provided in section
440.20(15) and Grice, to Lombardi's disability retirement pension benefits. If, on the other hand, no such provision exists, then we direct the JCC to consider section
440.21(1) and claimant's pro rata contributions to the disability retirement plan in determining any offset to workers' compensation benefits....
...rs' compensation payments as overpayments for failure to offset pension benefits. Since the pension plan is funded at least in part with employees' contributions, decreasing workers' compensation benefits on account of pension benefits runs afoul of section 440.21, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...[3] We assume that the supreme court implicitly found in Grice that social security disability benefits are not part of a "fund ... maintained by [the] employer for the purpose of providing compensation or medical services and supplies as required by this chapter." See § 440.21(1), Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1990 WL 48642
...1989), establishes their entitlement to an offset of workers' compensation benefits due to pension benefits paid to claimant by the city. In Barragan, in response to a certified question, the supreme court ruled that a judge of compensation claims may apply section 440.21, Florida Statutes, to award an increase in the amount of workers' compensation to offset reductions made in a claimant's pension benefits pursuant to a contractual provision....
...The case involved a City of Miami ordinance which provided for the offset of pension benefits against workers' compensation benefits. The court noted that Chapter 440 has preempted local regulation on the subject of workers' compensation, and that section 440.21 prohibits an employer from deducting workers' compensation benefits from an employee's pension benefits....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...1970), the Florida Supreme Court ruled that a claimant is entitled to full workers' compensation benefits in addition to any benefits under an insurance plan to which the claimant contributed. The court reasoned that a contrary holding would violate § 440.21, Florida Statutes, which provides that: No agreement by an employee ......
...1975), the court determined that monies received by a claimant from a non-contributory insurance plan should be credited against workers' compensation benefits only to the extent that the combined monies exceed a claimant's average weekly wage. The rulings in Hoagey and Brown effectively synthesize the interplay between §
440.21 and §
440.20(15), which provides that: When an employee is injured and the employer pays his full wages or any part thereof during the period of disability ......
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1283, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2409, 1988 WL 55672
...Although that practice was disapproved by the deputy in the original order and that order was affirmed by this court, recent decisions of this court have held that the City is not constrained by Jewel Tea Co. v. Florida Industrial Commission,
235 So.2d 289 (Fla. 1970), or section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1985), from reducing a claimant's pension benefits in accordance with the City's municipal ordinance....
...iting City of Miami v. Knight,
510 So.2d 1069. The court then certified to the supreme court the question of whether a monthly pension payment to an injured worker may be reduced due to the receipt of workers' compensation benefits without violating section
440.21....
...9.030(a)(2)(A)(v) we again certify to the supreme court the following question as one of great public importance: DOES THE EMPLOYER'S REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S PENSION BENEFITS, PURSUANT TO CONTRACTUAL PROVISION FOR OFFSET OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, PERMIT THE DEPUTY'S APPLICATION OF SECTION 440.21, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO AWARD COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO CLAIMANT "AT HIS COMBINED MAXIMUM MONTHLY WAGE"? We must also point out that the deputy commissioner can only make workers' compensation awards and in this case did not have jurisdiction over the Pension Board....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1961 Fla. LEXIS 2411
...In employment where an employee receives consideration other than cash as a portion of this compensation the value of such compensation shall be subject to the determination of the commission. (Emphasis added.) In addition to the foregoing, the claimant points to Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which provides in effect that no agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation shall be valid....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 93 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2909, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15726
...ployment. “The liability of the City to the injured employee was fixed by Chapter
440.11,
440.12 and
440.15, Florida Statutes; and the City could not require the employee to waive his right to compensation for permanent partial disability (Chapter
440.21) or appropriate it as a creditor (Chapter
440.22)....
...ction, be 60 percent of the average weekly wages, and shall be paid to the employee as prescribed by this section. Section
440.15(3), Florida Statutes. No agreement by an employee to waive his right to compensation under this chapter shall be valid. Section
440.21(2), Florida Statutes....
...at is in disregard of other laws. United Mine Workers of America v. Pennington,
381 U.S. 657 ,
85 S.Ct. 1585 ,
14 L. Ed.2d 626 (1965). The bargaining agreements relied upon by the City totally ignore Sections
440.10(1),
440.11(1),
440.15(2) and (3),
440.21 and
440.22, Florida Statutes; Rule 17 of the Florida Workmen’s Compensation Rules of Procedure, and the decisions in the Schel and Miller cases....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1997 WL 402111
§
120.80(10)(b), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996) and §
440.021, Fla. Stat. (1995), the Division of Workers' Compensation
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 1401695
.../C), to dismiss a petition for benefits on the ground that the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) entered into between the employer and the union of which claimant/employee, Roger Fernandez, is a member, was null and void, under the provisions of section 440.211, Florida Statutes (1995). [2] The JCC concluded that the agreement diminished the employee's entitlement to an independent medical examination (IME), otherwise available to him under chapter 440, Florida Statutes, contrary to section 440.211(2)....
...of diminishing claimant's entitlement to an IME with regard to indemnity as well as medical benefits. Wiggins was based on statutory language particularly applicable to managed-care arrangements, which is far narrower in scope than that provided in section 440.211(1)(b), allowing the parties to a CBA to agree upon "[t]he use of an agreed-upon list of certified health care providers of medical treatment which may be the exclusive source of all medical treatment under this chapter." (Emphasis add...
...n
440.134, interpreted by Wiggins to apply only to requests for IMEs involving exclusively medical care, [5] and not to claims for IMEs for the purpose of determining an injured employee's entitlement to potential indemnity benefits, the language in section
440.211(1)(b) does not include any requirement whatsoever of an IME....
...The CBA differs from that discussed in Heric v. City of Ormond Beach,
728 So.2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), which required an employee to exhaust his personal and sick leave benefits before he could receive his workers' compensation benefits. Nothing in section
440.211 countenances such an arrangement; in fact, the CBA there was contrary to the provisions of section
440.21, Florida Statutes, which invalidates any agreement requiring an employee to waive his or her right to compensation. We are not unaware that section
440.211(1)(c) authorizes "[t]he use of a limited list of physicians to conduct independent medical examinations which the parties may agree shall be the exclusive source of independent medical examiners pursuant to this chapter." After compar...
...the opinion that the statute does not inflexibly require a CBA to include an alternative list of IME providers once the agreement makes available to an injured worker "a list of certified health care providers of medical treatment," as permitted by section 440.211(1)(b)....
...Although the employee does not have the broader range of care available under section
440.13(5). we consider it important to observe once again that the alternative procedure afforded by a CBA need not be identical to that provided by chapter 440 without offending the provision in section
440.211(2) precluding the diminishment of an employee's entitlement to benefits....
...cting his choice from a list selected by the union and employer, and denied him as well the right to an IME, by limiting him only to a single, second medical opinion. In answering these arguments and others made by the employee that the CBA violated section 440.211(2), this court made the following pertinent observations: By definition, at least some of the procedures in a workers' compensation alternative dispute resolution system must differ from the dispute resolution procedures set out in chapter 440, Florida *993 Statutes (1995). Identical procedures do not constitute an alternative. When, as section 440.211 contemplates, a collective bargaining agreement establishes an alternative dispute resolution system, new means and methods are brought into existence to deliver the same statutory benefits. These procedural differences do not run afoul of section 440.211(2), Florida Statutes (1995)....
...If, as appellant argues, the agreement creates procedural requirements for the receipt of benefits that chapter 440 does not impose, the agreement also creates procedural opportunities for the provision of benefits that chapter 440 does not afford. As long as the benefits themselves are undiminished, the requirements of section 440.211, Florida Statutes (1995), are met. Id. at 552-53 (footnotes omitted). We therefore agree that although the CBA before us makes no explicit provision for an IME, it nonetheless adequately complies with section 440.211(1)(b) by providing Fernandez with a list of medical providers agreed upon by both his employer and his union, and it thereby supplants without diminishingthe provisions of chapter 440....
...BARFIELD and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Because the order determined that the judge of compensation claims had jurisdiction over a petition for benefits, it was appealable pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(b)(1)(A). [2] Section 440.211 provides in part: (1) Subject to the limitation stated in subsection (2), a provision that is mutually agreed upon in any collective bargaining agreement filed with the division between an individually self-insured employer or other e...
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 202300
...After the hearing, the judge of compensation claims entered an order denying the petition for benefits on the ground that the collective bargaining agreement provides the exclusive remedy for resolution of the claim. The judge concluded that the agreement creates an alternative dispute resolution system consistent with section 440.211, Florida Statutes and that the agreement did not diminish the claimant's entitlement to workers' compensation benefits. Section 440.211, Florida Statutes (1995) states: (1) Subject to the limitation stated in subsection (2), a provision that is mutually agreed upon in any collective bargaining agreement filed with the division between an individually self-insured empl...
...as otherwise set forth in this chapter. Any such agreement in violation of this provision shall be null and void. In Gassner v. Bechtel Construction,
702 So.2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), rev. denied,
717 So.2d 531 (Fla.1998), this court clarified that section
440.211 allows for the creation of a procedural system that is independent of Chapter 440 but does not authorize any changes in the benefits received by a claimant. We stated: This list of what purport to be diminished benefits reveals significant confusion about the distinction section
440.211 draws between benefits and (alternative) procedures....
...By definition, at least some of the procedures in a workers' compensation alternative dispute resolution system must differ from the dispute resolution procedures set out in chapter 440, Florida Statutes (1995). Identical procedures do not constitute an *1249 alternative. When, as section 440.211 contemplates, a collective bargaining agreement establishes an alternative dispute resolution system, new means and methods are brought into existence to deliver the same statutory benefits. These procedural differences do not run afoul of section 440.211(2), Florida Statutes (1995)....
...If, as appellant argues, the agreement creates procedural requirements for the receipt of benefits that Chapter 440 does not impose, the agreement also creates procedural opportunities for the provision of benefits that chapter 440 does not afford. As long as the benefits themselves are undiminished, the requirements of section 440.211, Florida Statutes (1995), are met....
...It is not necessary to decide whether the collective bargaining agreement in this case creates an alternative dispute resolution system because the judge's determination that the agreement does not diminish the claimant's entitlement to Chapter 440 workers' compensation benefits is erroneous. The provisions of section 440.211(2), Florida Statutes compel a conclusion that the collective bargaining agreement is invalid to the extent that it purports to regulate the method of recovering workers' compensation benefits. The agreement diminishes the claimant's entitlement to benefits by requiring him to exhaust his personal and sick leave benefits before he can receive workmen's compensation benefits. Relevant to this issue is section 440.21, Florida Statutes which states: (1) Any agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by her or his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by the employer for the purpose of prov...
...(2) An agreement by an employee to waive her or his right to compensation under this chapter is invalid. In the recent case, Nolan v. Delta Airlines, No. 98-857, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D555, ___ So.2d ___,
1999 WL 280805 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), this court held that it was a violation of section
440.21(2), Florida Statutes to compel an employee to use her sick and vacation leave rather than receive the statutorily mandated workers' compensation benefits....
...Section
440.09(1), Florida Statutes (1987), provides that compensation shall be paid, except for the situations enumerated in that section, none of which are applicable here. As recently recognized in Williams v. City of Fort Walton Beach,
691 So.2d 580, 581, n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), section
440.21 exists "to redress employers' misapplication of other employee entitlements in (legally ineffective) efforts to discharge workers' compensation obligations." See also Barragan v....
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1996).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
(1995). 4 Section
440.44, Fla. Stat. (1995). 5 Section
440.021, Fla. Stat. (1995). 6 See, Lee v. Florida Pine
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10348, 1992 WL 240615
...The supreme court held in Barragan that the deputy commissioner had jurisdiction to decide whether the city could reduce its pension benefits to the extent of workers’ compensation payments. The supreme court cited Jewel Tea Co., in which the court held that section 440.21, Florida Statutes, prevented a private employer from deducting group health insurance benefits from an injured claimant’s workers’ compensation benefits....
...Claimant is entitled to workmen’s compensation in addition to any benefits under an insurance plan to which he contributed. Id. at 291 .” Barragan,
545 So.2d at 254 . We certify the following question to be one of great public importance: Whether an increase in workers’ compensation benefits, awarded pursuant to section
440.21 to offset illegal deductions from an employee’s pension fund, in accordance with Barragan v....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14310, 2004 WL 2173337
...Our first review of this case required us to remand for the circuit court to consider the merits of Terry’s argument. Id. at 275 . The circuit court thereafter addressed Terry’s contention that the method used by the Board of Trustees to calculate a set-off violated section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes....
...Specifically, Terry complained the method employed by the pension board to set-off his workers’ compensation settlement from his disability pension effectively “wiped out” his settlement. Terry argued an alternative method should be employed. Section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes, states “[a]n agreement by an employee to waive her or his right to compensation under this chapter is invalid.” This section has effectively been read to prevent employers from deducting workers’ compensation benefits from pension benefits....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10164, 1992 WL 235325
...The supreme court held in Barra-gan that the deputy commissioner had jurisdiction to decide whether the city could reduce its pension benefits to the extent of workers’ compensation payments. The supreme court cited Jewel Tea Co., in which the court held that section 440.21, Florida Statutes, prevented a private employer from deducting group health insurance benefits from an injured claimant’s workers’ compensation benefits....
...to section
440.20(5) should be imposed on benefits due from February 11, 1978 through July 31,1989. We certify the following question to be one of great public importance: Whether an increase in workers’ compensation benefits, awarded pursuant to section
440.21 to offset illegal deductions from an employee’s pension fund, in accordance with Barragan v....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5081, 1992 WL 94154
...t’s actual wages and the claimant would not be entitled to any benefits but for the contract, we see nothing wrong with the parties’ agreement to set a limit upon the carrier’s exposure for disability and wage loss claims in this manner. While section 440.21(2) invalidates any agreement in which an employee waives his right to compensation under chapter 440, it is silent about an independent contractor’s right to limit his contracted-for entitlement to benefits in exchange for a fixed, and presumably lower, premium....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 2189, 2000 WL 242770
...t offsets beyond the initial Grice offset. The award of 1% credit for Paseual’s contribution to her SDR benefits fund is controlled by City of Hollywood v. Lombardy
738 So.2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). In Lombardi, the JCC was instructed to consider section
440.21(1), Florida Statutes (1993), 3 and the claimant’s pro rata contributions to the disability retirement plan to determine any offset to WC benefits....
...$209.56 toward her SDR benefits fund. From January 1, 1975, through the date of the accident HRS contributed 100% toward Pascual's SDR benefits fund. . This court’s decision in Pickard did not address the issue raised in the amicus curiae brief. . 440.21....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2381, 1993 WL 53139
PER CURIAM. We affirm the order of the judge of compensation claims. A judge of compensation claims has jurisdiction pursuant to section 440.21, Florida Statutes, to consider an award of additional compensation to offset illegal deductions of pension benefits when pension benefits have been reduced to the extent of workers’ compensation payments....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2515, 1992 WL 48907
...ment by claimant to accept a pension benefit reduced by any workers’ compensation to which he might be simultaneously entitled was valid and was not an agreement by an employee to waive his rights to workers’ compensation otherwise invalid under section 440.21(2), Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 9624, 2014 WL 2874297
...Lombardi,
770 So.2d 1196 (Fla.2000), and we affirm on the same authority. In Lombardi , the Florida Supreme Court wrote, [W]e hold that where the ‘pension plan is funded at least in part with employees’ contributions, decreasing workers’ compensation benefits on account of pension benefits runs afoul of section
440.21, Florida Statutes (1993).’ Thus, once it is determined that the pension plan is funded with employees’ contributions, workers’ compensation benefits are primary and it is the pension fund that is entitled to the benefit of the offset.... Our holding should not be read to mean that in all other cases the workers’ compensation fund automatically receives the benefit of the offset; rather, we hold only that where the fund is employee-contributory, it would violate section
440.21 for workers’ compensation benefits to be reduced.
770 So.2d at 1205 (quoting City of Hollywood v. Lombardi,
738 So.2d 491, 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)). Section
440.21, now as in 1993, invalidates “[a]ny agreement by an employee to pay any portion of premium paid by her or his employer to a carrier or to contribute to a benefit fund or department maintained by the employer for the purpose of provid...
...es from an employee-contributory pension plan is tantamount to requiring the claimant “to contribute to a benefit fund ... maintained by the employer for the purpose of providing” workers’ compensation benefits — a circumstance prohibited by section 440.21. The E/SA argues section 440.21 does not apply to the situation here because the inline-of-duty disability benefit fund — the FRS — is not maintained by the Employer (the county), but by the State....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 10817, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1525
...HAWKES, C.J., BENTON and LEWIS, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] "Unless it denies compensability or entitlement to benefits, the carrier shall pay compensation directly to the employee as required by §§
440.14,
440.15, and
440.16, in accordance with the obligations set forth in such sections." §
440.21(a), Fla....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2013 WL 598435, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2508
..., not a legal agreement or contract, until the occurrence of the condition precedent — approval by the JCC. This court’s interpretation is long-standing, binding, and consistent with the general proscriptive treatment of settlements contained in section
440.21(2), Florida Statutes (“[a]n agreement by an employee to waive her or his right to compensation under this chapter is invalid.”), for which exceptions are created in section
440.20(1l)(a)-(e), Florida Statutes....
...rom whole cloth. As we made clear most recently in 2008, “[a]b-sent compliance with section
440.20(11), any agreement by the [unrepresented] claimant to waive his right to workers’ compensation benefits [is] invalid. See §§
440.20(ll)(c) &
440.21(2), Fla....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8557, 1995 WL 478263
...ake an offset, provided it does not exceed the claimant’s pre-injury AWW. Had the pension benefits been substantially funded by the employee, one is compelled to conclude there would be a different result. We begin our discussion by observing that Section 440.21, Florida Statutes, precludes any offset for sick leave, group insurance disability, pension or other like benefits, whether paid or furnished in whole or in part by the employer, or contributed to by the employee, so long as the combin...
...relations commission rule 9, referred to in Brown,
305 So.2d at 193 . See also, Dept. of Highway Safety, etc. v. McBride,
420 So.2d 897 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), "[t]he rulings in Hoagey [Jewel Tea] and Brown effectively synthesize the interplay between §
440.21 and §
440.10(15) [F.S.]...." Section
440.20(15), which incorporates former rule 9 mentioned in Brown , was enacted into law in 1977 as section
440.20(13), later renumbered to §
440.20(15), and by amendment in 1994, Chapter 93-415, Section 26, Laws of Florida, was again renumbered as section
440.20(14)....
