Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

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