قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / 2. Courts grappled with eligibility for itinerant workers

2. Courts grappled with eligibility for itinerant workers



Legal disputes over whether workers injured while traveling were due to workers’ compensation led to several significant rulings in the past year.

In May, a Florida appeals court heard the case of a worker who was injured in an accident with a drunk driver while driving to work. The Court of Appeal ruled that while the injured driver was a “field employee,” his job did not begin until he arrived at the first job of the day.

In overturning a lower court i DSK Group Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Hernandez, the appeals court ruled that the worker was “a typical commuter employee” and therefore not entitled to compensation.

The story about the ruling was the second most read workers̵

7; compensation story Business insurances website 2022.

Other traveling employee rulings this year included an Ohio appeals court ruling that a traveling worker did not suffer a compensable injury when he fell in a restaurant parking lot while eating lunch with a colleague.

However, a New Hampshire tree company employee won wage benefits after he was seriously injured in an accident after being let off early from his shift due to an approaching storm.

That was decided by the state’s highest court that the exception “special case” from the rule “comes and goes”.

And in Kentucky, the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of a worker who was injured in an accident that occurred while returning to his employer’s property from a job site.

In his judgment, The Kentucky Supreme Court noted two exceptions to the general rule that commuting accidents are not covered by workers’ compensation applied in the case.

No. 3 most read story


Source link