Employer/Employee relationship contractual
It invokes the rule that the relation of employer and employee is contractual, specifically so
declared for purposes of the workmen's compensation act, and that the contract of
employment cannot be changed so as to substitute a new employer without the employee’s
knowledge and consent, citing Benson v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co. 124 Minn. 222, 144 N.W.
774, 50 L.R.A.(N.S.) 170; Melhus v. Sam John son & Sons Fisheries Co. Inc. 188 Minn. 304,
247 N.W. 2; Dahl v. Wunderlich, 194 Minn. 35, 259 N.W. 399; Murray v. Union Ry. Co. 229
N.Y. 110, 113, 127 N.E. 907, and many other cases. The gist of the rule invoked is stated by
Mr. Justice Cardozo in Murray v. Union Ry. Co. (supra) , cited by us with approval in Dahl v.
Wunderlich, (supra) : "The new relation cannot be thrust upon the servant without knowledge
or consent." The rule also is that the relation of employer and employee may be terminated at
any time by agreement of the parties. If the employee has notice or knowledge of the
substitution of a new employer and thereafter continues in his employment, he will be deemed
to have accepted the new employer and to have terminated the relation previously existing with
the old one. Benson v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co. and Murray v. Union Ry. Co. (supra) . Yoselowitz v. Peoples Bakery, 1938.MN.13 <http://www.versuslaw.com>, 277 N.W. 221 ( Minn. 1938).
PHONE #s: 970-330-3883/720-203-5142 c.
For mailing: Excellence Unlimited, 2830 27th St. Ln. #B115, Greeley , CO 80634
BEAR'S WEB PAGES: