2020 Georgia Code
Title 34 - Labor and Industrial Relations
Chapter 8 - Employment Security
Article 1 - General Provisions
§ 34-8-1. Short Title

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Employment Security Law."

(Code 1981, §34-8-1, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 139, § 1.)

- Ga. L. 1941, p. 229, §§ 1 through 3 ratified, approved, and confirmed an executive order and proclamation issued by the Governor on April 5, 1940, suspending the collection of unemployment compensation taxes upon certain items and from certain employers exempted by amendments to the Social Security Act approved in August, 1939.

- For survey article on local government law, see 34 Mercer L. Rev. 225 (1982). For annual survey of labor and employment law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 251 (2005).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under Ga. L. 1937, p. 806 and former Code Section 34-8-1, which was repealed by Ga. L. 1991, p. 139, § 1, effective January 1, 1992, are included in the annotations for this Code section.

- In determining whether an individual comes within the scope of Ga. L. 1937, p. 806 (see now O.C.G.A. Ch. 8, T. 34) it is first necessary to establish that the individual in question performs services for wages. Williamson v. Modern Homes Constr. Co., 114 Ga. App. 340, 151 S.E.2d 488 (1966) (decided under Ga. L. 1937, p. 806).

- Courts, as well as the administrator of the unemployment law, in construing and applying the provisions of such law must liberally construe and apply such law in light of the public policy of this state. Dalton Brick & Tile Co. v. Huiet, 102 Ga. App. 221, 115 S.E.2d 748 (1960) (decided under Ga. L. 1937, p. 806).

Courts shall be guided by the fact that the unemployment compensation law is intended to provide some income for persons who are, without fault of their own, temporarily out of employment. Dalton Brick & Tile Co. v. Huiet, 102 Ga. App. 221, 115 S.E.2d 748 (1960) (decided under Ga. L. 1937, p. 806).

Substitute teacher's employment was intermittent by nature and not the type of employment that Georgia's Employment Security Law was designed to encourage; consequently, the teacher was not unemployed as defined by statute as a matter of law at the time that the teacher filed a claim for unemployment benefits, and the teacher's claim for benefits was properly denied. Campbell v. Poythress, 216 Ga. App. 834, 456 S.E.2d 110 (1995).

- Under the Administrative Procedure Act the adoption of "[r]ules relating to . . . benefits by the state or of an agency" is expressly exempted by O.C.G.A. § 50-13-2(6)(I) from the strict rulemaking procedural requirements of O.C.G.A. § 50-13-4. This includes the promulgation of policies determining eligibility for entitlement and rules for granting unemployment benefits. Caldwell v. Amoco Fabrics Co., 165 Ga. App. 674, 302 S.E.2d 596 (1983) (decided under former § 34-8-1).

Cited in Huiet v. Dayan, 194 Ga. 250, 21 S.E.2d 423 (1942); Johnson v. Huiet, 67 Ga. App. 638, 21 S.E.2d 437 (1942); Lee v. State, 73 Ga. App. 821, 38 S.E.2d 128 (1946); Banks v. Huiet, 111 Ga. App. 607, 142 S.E.2d 421 (1965); Caldwell v. Atlanta Bd. of Educ., 152 Ga. App. 291, 262 S.E.2d 573 (1979).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- What constitutes appropriate relief for retaliatory discharge under § 11(c) of Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) (29 U.S.C.S. § 660(c)), 134 A.L.R. Fed 629.