Purpose Driven Personnel/ Hartford; Countrywide Payroll; North Bay Distribution/Compwest; H&M Hennes & Mauritz/Travelers Arturo Chavez WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAARTURO CHAVEZ, Applicant,vs.PURPOSE DRIVEN PERSONNEL/ MRTFORD; COUNTRYWIDE PAYROLL; NORTH BAY DISTRIBUTION/COMPWEST; H&M HENNES & MAURITZ/TRAVELERS. Defendant,Case No. ADJ10233708OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant Purpose Driven Personnel seeks reconsideration of the September 23, 2019 Findings of Fact wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that North Bay Distributing was applicant’s special employer on August 15, 2015,and that Purpose Driven Personnel, Country Wide Payroll and HR Solutions (Countrywide) were applicant’s general employers on that date. The WCJ also found that Hennes & Mauritz (H & M) was not applicant’s employer. Finally, the WCJ found that Countrywide failed to appear at trial. Defendant Purpose Driven Personnel contends that it was not applicant’s employer because it did not process applicant’s payroll or direct his work. Defendant argues that, pursuant to a service agreement between Countrywide and Purpose Driven Personnel, Countrywide agreed to process payroll and obtain workers’ compensation insurance for joint employees of Countrywide and Purpose Driven Personnel. We have reviewed the record in this matter. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that the petition be denied. For the reasons discussed below, as ojjr Decision After Reconsideration, rescind the September 23, 2019 Findings of Fact and return this matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. , BACKGROUND The sole issue in dispute at trial was “employment.” (September 5, 2019 Minutes of Hearing and Summary of Evidence (MOH/SOE), p. 2.) Richard Carroll, who has been employed by H & M for 15 years, and is currentl
Menu
