Pettis v. Indus. Comm'n
In Pettis v. Indus. Comm'n, 91 Ariz. 298, 302, 372 P.2d 72 (1962), the claimant argued the ICA's decision to compute his average monthly wage by dividing his total yearly earnings by twelve months failed to account for the two months of the year he did not cut timber due to a shutdown by his employer. 91 Ariz. at 300.
Evidence showed that weather conditions in Arizona permitted timber cutting year-round and the claimant testified "he could have worked had his employer worked." Id. at 302.
The Pettis court explained that an expanded wage base of twelve months could be a proper method of calculating the average monthly wage of a seasonal employee, but held the claimant was not a seasonal employee because his two-month loss of work was due to an "employer shutdown" over which he had no control. Id. at 303.