The Texas Supreme Court decided, in the case of HCBeck Ltd. v. Rice, ___S.W.3d___, No. 06-0418 (Tex. April 3, 2009), the extent to which a general contractor must provide workers’ compensation insurance under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act to qualify for the statutory employer status and resulting immunity form work-related claims of subcontractor’s employees. A court of appeals had ruled that a general contractor does not provide coverage in the manner contemplated by the statute when its written contract only requires that the subcontractor enroll in the on-site owner’s workers’ compensation insurance plan. The Texas Supreme Court disagreed and held that a general workplace insurance plan that binds the general contractor to provide workers’ compensation insurance for its subcontractors achieves the Texas Legislature’s objective to ensure that the subcontractor’s employees receive the benefit of workers’ compensation coverage.

      HCBeck, Ltd. entered into a subcontract with Haley Greer for the construction of a project owned by FMR Texas, Ltd. ("FMR"). FMR provided workers’ compensation and required enrollment of HCBeck and its subcontractors. HCBeck incorporated the insurance terms into its subcontract with Haley Greer with one exception- the subcontract provided that if the OCIP was cancelled then Haley Greer was required to provide alternative insurance at HCBeck’s cost. FMR purchased the OCIP coverage and Haley Greer’s employees were enrolled in the program.

      During the project, one of Haley Greer’s employees, Mr. Charles Rice, was injured. Mr. Rice collected his workers’ compensation but then attempted to sue HCBeck in tort. HCBeck claimed it was immune from tort liability under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. In response, Rice claimed that HCBeck did not "provide" the insurance as contemplated by the statute. The Texas Supreme Court disagreed with Mr. Rice and stated that HCBeck was immune from tort liability under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act because it did "provide" insurance to Haley Greer since it was contractually obligated to obtain insurance to cover the employees on the jobsite or compensate Haley Greer for any insurance premiums or expenses required to complete to work in the event that the OCIP policy was cancelled. In conclusion, the court stated that the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act was intended to be the exclusive remedy defense available to a general contractor who, by use of a written agreement with the owners and subcontractors, provides workers’ compensation coverage to its subcontractors and their employees. Therefore, the court held that in this case that the owner’s insurance plan qualified as HCBeck "providing" insurance under the Act.