DENNY'S RESTAURANT, APPELLANT,
v.
JODY BELL, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Denny's Restaurant appealed a workers' compensation order that included unreported tips in the employee's average weekly wage calculation. The court affirmed, holding that employers cannot rely on the statutory requirement for written tip reporting when they fail to adequately inform employees of their reporting obligations and the consequences of non-compliance.
The employer/carrier may not rely on the written reporting provision in section 440.02(24) when they have failed to adequately inform the claimant of her potential rights and responsibilities under the statute, including the consequences of failing to report tips.
[1] An employer may not rely on a statutory reporting requirement for gratuities if the employer failed to adequately inform the claimant of their rights and responsibilities…
[2] Workers' compensation law is intended to be a self-executing system, obligating employers to provide claimants with adequate information regarding conditions affecting po…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“gratuities to the extent reported to the employer in writing as taxable income received in the course of employment from others than the employer”
The statutory definition of wages under section 440.02(24), requiring written reporting of tips
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJody Bell was employed at Denny's Restaurant. The employer had confusing procedures for reporting tips, and actually advised Bell to report less than …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Average Weekly Wage Computation cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, Judge.
The employer/carrier appeal a workers’ compensation order by which unreported tips were included in the average weekly wage computation. The employer/carrier contend that this is contrary to the written reporting requirement in section 440.02(24), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990). We conclude that the employer/carrier may not rely on this provision when they have failed to adequately inform the claimant of her potential rights and responsibilities under the statute.
Section 440.02(24), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1990), defines wages to include: ... gratuities to the extent reported to the employer in writing as taxable income received in the course of employment from others than the employer....
Prior to the enactment of this provision the case law limited gratuities to the reported amount only if the employer had implemented a reasonable reporting procedure. E.g., Hanks v. Tom Brantley’s Tire Broker, 500 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Subsequent cases under this new enactment have continued to address the employer’s procedures, while recognizing that the statute now requires the claimant to make a written report of the gratuities. See Mehrer v. Creative Hairdressers, 659 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Value Rent-A-Car v. Liccardo, 603 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
In the present case the judge found that the employer’s procedures were confusing, and that the claimant was actually advised to report less than the total amount of her tips. The record indicates that the claimant was not properly informed of the reporting requirement in section 440.02(24), or the statutory consequences of a failure to fully report. Because the Workers’ Compensation Law is intended to be a self-executing employer/carrier monitored system, the employer/carrier are obligated to provide the claimant with adequate information regarding the conditions and requirements affecting her potential entitlement to benefits. Alberta v. American Freight Systems, 565 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Wood v. McTyre Trucking, 526 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Gall Silica Mining v. Sheffield, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Consistent with these cases, the employer/carrier may not rely on the reporting provision in section 440.02(24), given their failure to apprise the claimant of this responsibility and the consequences of a failure to report.
The appealed order is affirmed.
DAVIS, J., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Morrison's & Gab Bus. Servs. v. Morgan, 666 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Denny’s Restaurant v. Bell, 659 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). BARFIELD, ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Wood v. McTYRE Trucking Co., Inc., 526 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Alberta v. Am. Freight Sys., 565 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Hanks v. TOM Brantley's Tire Broker & Orion Grp., 500 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Jones v. State, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Lessie May Cooper v. State, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Value Rent A CAR v. Liccardo, 603 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Green v. State, 659 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)