Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1954 )

E ENERAI.
June 4., 1954
Hon. Weldon Hart, Chairman Upinion No. S-127
Texas Employment Commission
Austin, Texas Re: Construction of Article 5221b+
(c)(5), V.C.S., to determine the
denominator of the fraction rep-
resenting “State experience fac-
tor” as that term is used in the
Dear Mr. Hart: above statute.
You have requested an opinion from this office; the sub-
stance of your question I quote from your letter as follows:
“Under Section’ 7 of the Unemployment Act (Art.
522113-5, V.C.S.) from which the foregoing quotations
have been taken, what is prescribed as the denominator
of the fraction repres~enting the State experience factor 7
Is it the State-wide total of all ‘benefit wages’ or is it
the State-wide total of all ‘employers’ benefit wages’? ”
Article 5221b-5 (c)(5), Vernon’s Civil Statutes, reads as
follows:
“(5) For any cal~endar year the total benefits
paid from the fund, less all amounts credited to the
fund except employers’ contributions collected under
this Section, and except interest earned on the fund,
shall be termed the ‘amount required from employers.’
bution payment-on wages for employment in that year
and such determination shall be made upon the basis of
figures for the preceding calendar year; such State ex-
perience factor shall not be affected by any subsequent
adjustment of any employers’s benefit wages.” (Empha-
sis added.)
The terms “benefit wa es” and “employer’s benefit wages”
are defined in Article 5221b-5 (*d)(23(A). This office is of the opinion
that the Legislature’s particular use of the term “benefit wages” in
setting out the denominator of the fraction representing the “State
Hon. Weldon Hart, page 2 (S-127)
experience factor” means “benefit wages,” not ‘!employer’s benefit wages.”
Prior to a 1949 amendment of this statute the meanings of the
words “benefit wages” and “employer’s benefit wages’ were synonymous.
Section 5 of Chapter 148, Acts of 51st Legislature, 1949, page 283, changed
the meanings of these terms so that ‘employer’s benefit wages” now has a
meaning different from that of “benefit wages.” In Section 5B of Chapter
148, Acts of 51st Legislature, the Legisla,ture amended the language defin-
ing “State experience factor.” Prior to the amendment the pertinent lan-
guage defining “State experience factor” read as follows:
Y
. . . The amount required from employers, divided
by the state-wide total of ‘employer’s benefit wages’ of all
employer~s for that calendar year, after adjustments to the
nearest multiple of one per centum (1%) shall be termed
the ‘State experience factor’. . .’ .-
Section 5B substituted in lieu of the above-underlined words the term
-benefit wages. ” It is a well establ.ished doctrine of statutory construction
that the change of language of a statute by amendment should be given ef-
fect. 39 Tex.Jur. 241, Statutes Sec. 128; see also Putnam Supply Co. Y.
Cha in, 45 S.W.Zd 283 (Tex.Civ.App. 193 1); Robinson v. Wbaley Farm
or oration 120 Tex. 633, 37 S.W.2d 714; Gately v. Humphrey, 254 S.W.2d
z&-+ ex. up. 1952). And, the fact that the Legislature specifically re-
defined the two terms herein discuss.ed is indicative that the Legislature
was conscious of the distinction and specific use of these terms in the
statute.
SUMMARY
The State-wide total of all “benefit wages”, is the
denominator of the fraction constituting the “State exper-
ience factar.,” within the contemplation of the Texas Un-
employment Compensation Act.
Yours very truly,
JOHN BEN SHEPPERD
Attorney General
APPROVED:
W. V. Geppert
Taxation Division
J. A. Amis, Jr. Assistant
Reviewer
John Atchfnson
Reviewer
Robert, S. Trotti
First Assistant