State ex rel. State Labor Com'r v. Goodwill Industries

• Decision Date: 28 December 1970
• Docket Number: No. 9083,9083
• Citation: State ex rel. State Labor Com'r v. Goodwill Industries, 478 P.2d 543, 82 N.M. 215, 1970 NMSC 163 (N.M. 1970)
• Parties: , 19 Wage & Hour Cas. (BNA) 845, 64 Lab.Cas. P 52,477 STATE of New Mexico ex rel. STATE LABOR COMMISSIONER of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

Page 543

478 P.2d 543

82 N.M. 215, 19 Wage & Hour Cas. (BNA) 845,

64 Lab.Cas. P 52,477

STATE of New Mexico ex rel. STATE LABOR COMMISSIONER of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 9083.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Dec. 28, 1970.

Hernandez, Atkinson, Kitts, Kelsey & Hanna, Albuquerque, for defendant-appellant.

James A. Maloney, Atty. Gen., John A. Darden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee.

OPINION

SISK, Justice.

Defendant, Goodwill Industries, appeals from a judgment ordering the payment of $204.55 to Delfino Ulibarri, represented by the plaintiff, State Labor Commissioner, which sum represents the difference paid to Ulibarri by Goodwill Industries as an employee and the minimum wage required by law. We will refer to the interested parties as Goodwill, Ulibarri, and Commissioner. Goodwill alleges error by the trial court in holding that an employer-employee relationship, controlled by applicable minimum wage standards, existed between it and Ulibarri, and denies that it was required to obtain an exemption certificate from the Commissioner pursuant to our Minimum Wage Act, §§ 59--3--20 through 59--3--26, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Supp.1969).

Goodwill contends that Ulibarri was not an employee but was a 'rehabilitation client' hired by it, a non-profit charitable corporation, in furtherance of its primary function of rehabilitation of handicapped persons. It alleges that Ulibarri was a chronic alcoholic and that his employment was primarily for purposes of rehabilitative therapy.

The effect of the trial court's findings and conclusions was that, during the period in dispute, there existed between Goodwill and Ulibarri a relationship of employer and employee, and that Ulibarri was not a rehabilitative client and Goodwill was therefore not entitled to the exemption from the Minimum Wage Act provided for by § 59--3--22.1, supra, for certain classifications of employees whose earning or productive capacity is impaired by physical or mental handicap.

We affirm. We must examine the evidence in the light most favorable to support the trial court's findings and conclusions, and must indulge in all reasonable inferences in favor of the successful party, and if the court's findings and resulting conclusions are supported by substantial evidence they will not be disturbed on appeal. Jones v. Anderson, 81 N.M. 423, 467 P.2d 995 (1970); Payne v. Tuozzoli, 80 N.M. 214, 453 P.2d 384 (1969).

Ulibarri had previously worked for Goodwill as a truck driver from December 12, 1966 to June 14, 1967, admittedly as a regular employee and not as a rehabilitative client. He was laid off following an arrest for drunken and reckless driving; he was rehired from June 29, 1967 until October 11, 1967, during which time he performed janitorial work and occasionally drove a small truck. Ulibarri testified that he was not informed and was unaware that he was rehired in a rehabilitative-client capacity. Mr. Lynn, Director of Goodwill, testified that they did hire non-handicapped persons to fill vacancies in order to maintain industrial progress, and that Ulibarri had been referred originally to Goodwill by the New Mexico State Employment Agency, a source of referral for other nonhandicapped persons hired by Goodwill. Also, Mr. Giese, Director of Vocational Rehabilitation for Goodwill, testified that he was not sufficiently aware of Ulibarri's drinking problem to be able to classify him as an alcoholic. The fact that Ulibarri drove a truck for Goodwill even after he was rehired is further indication that his re-employment was more from necessity for his services for the benefit of...