WORKERS' COMPENSATION

The Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act takes away from employees their right to sue their employers for injuries they suffer in the course and scope of their employment. The loss of the right to sue is balanced by the strict liability that the Act imposes on employers. With few exceptions, when employees are injured while working, they are automatically entitled to medical and income benefits structured in the Act. The injured employee need not prove that the employer was negligent, and any negligence or fault on the employee's part does not reduce or eliminate the employee's entitlement to benefits.

Sometimes the courts struggle to determine whether an employee was actually in the course and scope of employment when the injury occurred. In a recent case, a management-level employee of a university sought workers' compensation benefits for the permanent loss of the use of an eye. The employee was attending a meeting in a conference room when he felt a sneeze coming on. Not wanting to offend others or spread germs, the employee tried to suppress the sneeze but failed, sneezing violently. He later described experiencing a sensation like a rubber band snapping onto his left eye following the sneeze. He was diagnosed with a detached retina and two retinal tears. Subsequent surgery repaired the damage but left the employee's vision impaired and his eye vulnerable to future deterioration.

The employer opposed any award of benefits, claiming that the employee was not obliged to avoid sneezing and that his attempt to avoid the sneeze was not caused by any workplace conditions. The court rejected the employer's arguments and confirmed that an employee's "working" includes ordinary down-time as well as activity at the workplace not directly involving assigned work. As long as an employee has not "abandoned" his duties and as long as his activity is not totally "foreign" to the employer's needs and objectives, the employee is entitled to benefits if injured.

Not all workplace injuries are compensable. A retail store employee witnessed a violent stabbing of a co-worker and suffered from recurrent nightmares and anxiety and stress disorders. She was denied any benefits even though she was actually eating lunch in a restaurant operated by the employer when the assault occurred. Because she was not required to eat on the premises, the court found that she was not acting in the course and scope of her employment.

Finally, employees can lose their entitlement to benefits if their conduct amounts to a violation of the employer's work rules. In a recent case, employees at a manufacturing plant argued and bumped into each other while operating forklift trucks. The court denied the injured employee any benefits because the rules posted in the workplace forbade employees from leaving their assigned work areas, from arguing, and from engaging in any horseplay. Because the employer proved that the claimant employee was outside his assigned area and was talking with others about eating hot chicken wings at the time that the argument started, the court found that he was in violation of several clear workplace rules and forfeited any benefits.

Employees injured in the course and scope of work activities should take prompt steps to document the circumstances of their injuries. Employers should be equally concerned with memorializing the facts and circumstances of workplace injuries. The posting of specific rules prohibiting unwanted conduct can protect an employer from liability for workers' compensation benefits.

The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.

Copyright © 2002 by Davis Bennett & Spiess LLC, Attorneys at Law. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.