All New Jersey employers are familiar with the requirement to maintain workers compensation insurance to provide medical treatment, income and other benefits to their employees injured on the job. However, it is not always clear when an employee injury is covered by an employer’s policy. The “coming and going” rule usually renders coverage inapplicable for injuries incurred by an employee while traveling to and from work. The most common exceptions to that rule involve circumstances where an employee is partially on the employer’s premises while in the process of arriving or leaving. The courts have also made exceptions in cases where, thanks to the action or inaction of the employer, an employee is forced to use a particular access route to work which is arguably dangerous.
The protection of the “coming and going” rule can also be undermined by another legal doctrine, that of “intervening cause.” This applies to situations in which an employee suffers a covered injury and later has another injury which would usually not be covered, that is, an injury not related to employment. If the second injury can be traced back to the original, covered injury, the second injury is also covered. In some cases, employees appeared to have suffered some damage due to working conditions which did not result in workplace injury. Nevertheless, subsequent off-premises injuries were considered to have been caused by the working conditions, and covered.
Cases where courts have used this doctrine to expand coverage include one where an employee who had been required to work in extreme cold and under unusual tension due to a lengthy labor dispute later suffered a cerebral hemorrhage. Another case involved an employee who suffered a covered injury to his eyes and was prescribed dark glasses. When he subsequently was injured by falling downstairs at home while wearing the glasses, those injuries were also covered. In another case, an employee wearing a cast on his leg as a result of a covered injury tripped and fell at a wedding reception and injured his arm. The arm injury was covered.
It is important to note that a key element in these cases is that the employee did not engage in any kind of negligence or misbehavior contributing to the second injury. Medical testimony may also be needed to establish that the second injury resulted from the first, or from something that happened in the workplace.
As far as coming and going are concerned, a recent case extended coverage to an employee who usually worked days and was required for several consecutive days to work overtime on the night shift. When the employee fell asleep at the wheel on his way home, his injuries were deemed covered. The court found that the injuries arose out of the course of employment and that the accident was a consequence of the conditions under which the employee was required to work. Presumably, this exception would not apply where a night shift employee was working his usual schedule.
On the other hand, an even more recent case may signal a pullback from the trend of expanding coverage. The case involved an employee who was hit by a car on the way to work while crossing the public street between her employer’s premises and the parking garage where the employer rented space for employee parking. The court found that the injury was not covered because the employer did not own or control the parking garage or the street. It is also significant that although the employer provided free parking it did not require employees to park there and cross the street.
Whether or not a particular injury is covered depends greatly on the precise facts of that particular situation. This makes coverage decisions hard to predict.
DISCLAIMER – This article is for general information only and is not intended to provide legal advice or to address specific legal problems. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For legal advice concerning workers compensation and all other legal matters, consult an attorney.
This entry was posted in MMJ Commentary. Bookmark the
permalink. Comments are closed, but you can leave a trackback:
Trackback URL.
WORKERS COMPENSATION – When is an employee coming or going? PART 2
All New Jersey employers are familiar with the requirement to maintain workers compensation insurance to provide medical treatment, income and other benefits to their employees injured on the job. However, it is not always clear when an employee injury is covered by an employer’s policy. The “coming and going” rule usually renders coverage inapplicable for injuries incurred by an employee while traveling to and from work. The most common exceptions to that rule involve circumstances where an employee is partially on the employer’s premises while in the process of arriving or leaving. The courts have also made exceptions in cases where, thanks to the action or inaction of the employer, an employee is forced to use a particular access route to work which is arguably dangerous.
The protection of the “coming and going” rule can also be undermined by another legal doctrine, that of “intervening cause.” This applies to situations in which an employee suffers a covered injury and later has another injury which would usually not be covered, that is, an injury not related to employment. If the second injury can be traced back to the original, covered injury, the second injury is also covered. In some cases, employees appeared to have suffered some damage due to working conditions which did not result in workplace injury. Nevertheless, subsequent off-premises injuries were considered to have been caused by the working conditions, and covered.
Cases where courts have used this doctrine to expand coverage include one where an employee who had been required to work in extreme cold and under unusual tension due to a lengthy labor dispute later suffered a cerebral hemorrhage. Another case involved an employee who suffered a covered injury to his eyes and was prescribed dark glasses. When he subsequently was injured by falling downstairs at home while wearing the glasses, those injuries were also covered. In another case, an employee wearing a cast on his leg as a result of a covered injury tripped and fell at a wedding reception and injured his arm. The arm injury was covered.
It is important to note that a key element in these cases is that the employee did not engage in any kind of negligence or misbehavior contributing to the second injury. Medical testimony may also be needed to establish that the second injury resulted from the first, or from something that happened in the workplace.
As far as coming and going are concerned, a recent case extended coverage to an employee who usually worked days and was required for several consecutive days to work overtime on the night shift. When the employee fell asleep at the wheel on his way home, his injuries were deemed covered. The court found that the injuries arose out of the course of employment and that the accident was a consequence of the conditions under which the employee was required to work. Presumably, this exception would not apply where a night shift employee was working his usual schedule.
On the other hand, an even more recent case may signal a pullback from the trend of expanding coverage. The case involved an employee who was hit by a car on the way to work while crossing the public street between her employer’s premises and the parking garage where the employer rented space for employee parking. The court found that the injury was not covered because the employer did not own or control the parking garage or the street. It is also significant that although the employer provided free parking it did not require employees to park there and cross the street.
Whether or not a particular injury is covered depends greatly on the precise facts of that particular situation. This makes coverage decisions hard to predict.
DISCLAIMER – This article is for general information only and is not intended to provide legal advice or to address specific legal problems. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For legal advice concerning workers compensation and all other legal matters, consult an attorney.