Narrative Opinion Summary
In this appellate case, the appellants challenge a workers' compensation order which included employer contributions to the appellee's Capital Accumulation Plan (CAP) in the calculation of the average weekly wage (AWW). The primary legal issue revolves around whether these CAP contributions should be classified as wages according to section 440.02(24) of the Florida Statutes. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) initially included the CAP as 'deferred wages'; however, the appellate court disagrees, emphasizing that such contributions are fringe benefits rather than wages. The court references the precedent set by Orange County School Board v. Muscanell, which clarifies that certain benefits, while taxable, should not be considered in AWW calculations. Consequently, the court reverses the JCC's decision and remands the case for a recalculation of the appellee's AWW without including the CAP contributions. Judges Webster and Lewis concur with this outcome, reaffirming the exclusion of the CAP from AWW computations as consistent with statutory and case law interpretations.
Legal Issues Addressed
Definition of Wages under Florida Statutes Section 440.02(24)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determines that employer contributions to a Capital Accumulation Plan do not qualify as wages under this statute.
Reasoning: They argue that these contributions do not constitute wages under the definition provided by section 440.02(24) of the Florida Statutes (1997).
Exclusion of Fringe Benefits from Average Weekly Wage Calculationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Fringe benefits such as contributions to a Capital Accumulation Plan are excluded from the average weekly wage calculation as they are not deemed wages.
Reasoning: The appellate court asserts that the CAP should be excluded from the AWW calculation as it is a fringe benefit, not defined as wages under the statute.
Precedent on Inclusion of Benefits in Average Weekly Wagesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court relies on precedent that certain benefits, while taxable, should not be included in the average weekly wage calculation.
Reasoning: This conclusion is supported by precedent from Orange County School Board v. Muscanell, which determined that certain benefits, although taxable upon receipt, should not be included in AWW calculations.