Mayagüez Dock & Shipping Co. v. Superintendent of Insurance

45 P.R. 244
CourtSupreme Court of Puerto Rico
DecidedJune 15, 1933
DocketNo. 1
StatusPublished

This text of 45 P.R. 244 (Mayagüez Dock & Shipping Co. v. Superintendent of Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayagüez Dock & Shipping Co. v. Superintendent of Insurance, 45 P.R. 244 (prsupreme 1933).

Opinion

Mr. Chibe Justice Del Toro

delivered the opinion of the-Conrt.

This is a proceeding for review, instituted in accordance-with section 27 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, No. 85 of 1928, (Soltero, Supt. of Insurance v. District Court, 41 P.R.R. 511), and prosecuted under the rules established in the case of Aguadilla Lighter & S. Co. v. Soltero, 43 P.R.R. 209.

The Mayagüez Dock and Shipping Co. complains tjhat the Superintendent of Insurance unduly applied to its work[245]*245men classification 7309 of the “Workmen’s Compensation and Employers’ Liability Insurance Manual.” It maintains that Nos. 7034 and 7317 of said Manual should he applied to it.

The attitude of the company is set forth in a letter written by its President to the Superintendent of Insurance, us follows:

"We refer to the interview recently bad by the undersigned with you in connection with the insurance premiums of our workmen.
“For your information we are enclosing herewith a copy of the letter we wrote on November 28th last to the Treasurer of Puerto Rico when we first stated to said Department our views on the matter.
"Meanwhile and after conferring with you we have obtained a Manual on Workmen’s Compensation Insurance and Bulletin No. 1 containing the rates applicable in Puerto Rico, the last of these having been furnished to us by your office.
“After a study of said Manual and in accordance with our best opinion, we believe that the workmen employed in our warehouses can not be regarded as those commonly designated as ‘Stevedores’. We believe that the latter workmen are those directly connected with the loading and unloading of ships, such as those who work on board the ships and in the docks where the ships moor, while the workmen employed by us in our warehouses only do the work of moving cargo on cartwheels or by hand from one place to another, and more properly fall under the classification, ‘Storage Warehouses’ Code No. 8291, the rate for which is $2.47, or perhaps under the classification, ‘Warehousing’ Code No. 8292, the corresponding rate being $2.67. As a matter of fact the business in which we utilize ■our workmen is that of storing, receiving, or delivering merchandise in warehouses, which is properly known in the United States as ‘Warehouses’ or ‘Storage Business.’
"In applying the ‘Stevedores’ classification in our case, our business is confused with that of piers where ships moor and where the laborers known as ‘longshoremen’ work, which as you know are those that do work properly called ‘Stevedoring.’
"We, therefore, request that instead of classification 7309 which has been applied to us, No. 8291 be applied and which corresponds to ‘Storage Warehouse,’ or perhaps No. 8292 pertaining to ‘Warehousing. ’
[246]*246“Under the classification ‘Stevedoring’ is included No. 7317 for workmen, who, like ours, do not operate cranes or hoisting machines, which classification, having a lower rate than those indicated above, would be more beneficial to us, but we do not expect that said classification be applied to us, for in reality it is not applicable to us, as our workmen do absolutely no work of ‘ Stevedoring. ’ The only work they do is that of receipt and delivery in warehouses or deposits.
“An ocular inspection of our establishment would serve to verify the above assertion and would tend to make the existing confusion disappear and to bring about the application to us of the proper classification. Hence, we take the liberty of suggesting to you the advisability, or rather the necessity that exists for such an inspection, and we request, if proper, that you order the same to be effected.
“Regarding the men employed as crew on board the lighters which we use in our business in this port, the classification ‘Stevedoring’ (N.O.C.) No. 7309, rate $7.51, has been applied to them. These men do no work as ‘Stevedores’ either. The Manual contains a classification for ‘Barges, scows, lighters,’ and as our business is precisely that of transporting cargo by the use of barges or lighters, we believe that this is the classification applicable to us, and we therefore submit this matter to your consideration.
“There remain the crew or operators of the tugboats and the laborers who work on the construction or repair of the boats, to whom classification 7088, whose rate is $5.09, has been applied. As you will see, the Manual gives a classification under ‘Tugboats’ for the former and under ‘Boat building’ (N.O.C.) for the latter. We also call your attention to this classification.
“We forgot to mention the clerks in the pier and in the warehouse, which according to your letter of Sept. 12, 1928, fall under classification 8709, paying 97^ each $100. However, classification 7088 paying $5.09 has been applied to us.”

The position of the Superintendent is stated in his answer to the above from which we copy the following:

“This preliminary assessment corresponds, according to the facts in the case, to the tax period from August 13, 1928, to June 30, 1929.
“The liquidation made by the Treasurer of Puerto Rico is as follows:
[247]*247Code Occupation Bate Salary Premium
7309 Loading and unloading vessels_7. 51 $42, 000 $3,154. 20
8810 Office_ 0.05 5,000 2.50
7088 Lighterage Service. 5. 09 7, 360 374. 64
Total_ $54, 360 $3, 531. 34
‘ ‘ For the sake of clearness in the discussion of your case, we will divide the question into two parts, to wit:
“a. That referring to the clerks in the pier.
“b. That referring to the classification covering the risk.
“As to the first part of the problem, this Superintendent decides the case in your favor as this is in complete accord with the provisions of the Manual, that is, it is ruled that to the $2,500 in the payroll submitted with the schedule and pertaining to the classification of warehouses employees must be applied the rate of 974 under code 8709.
“As to the second part, that is, as to the nature and classification of your risk the ruling is as follows:
“1. — Tour business is one of loading and unloading cargo in the port of Mayagüez. The acts of loading and unloading are grouped for the purpose of the assessment of the premium regardless of whether those acts are effected at a place where there is a pier or where there is a wharf. That is, the specific allegation that it differs as to the conditions of the port from other work or industry of the same nature, is immaterial.
“The word ‘stevedoring’ refers to the work made by the stevedore who according to Webster is:
“ ‘one whose occupation is to load and unload vessels in port.’
“From this definition it can be seen that it is immaterial what the condition of the port may be.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 P.R. 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayaguez-dock-shipping-co-v-superintendent-of-insurance-prsupreme-1933.