Compo case while working from
home
Woman gets compensation from fall over family pet while
working in her own home garage (USA)
The injury a J.C.
Penney & Co. (USA) salesperson suffered when she tripped over her dog while working at home arose from her
employment, Oregon’s Court of Appeals has ruled.
The workers’
compensation claimant in Mary S. Sandberg vs. J.C. Penney Co. Inc. was a decorator, selling window furnishings and
bedding in the clients own home. Most of her work week was spent travelling to appointments, and meeting with
customers to show then samples in their own homes, or else, working from her own
home/office.
The job required
that she have an office in her car, where she kept fabric samples and pricing guides. Her employer also instructed
her to store excess products at her home or find another place for them.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b72c8/b72c84148c6e7601482a80fa6ef1acd2696083f4" alt="Working from home Working from home"
Consequently, she
stored samples in her garage and was walking from the back door of her home to her garage to replace fabrics in her
van when she tripped over her family pet dog, and fractured her wrist.
The local Workers’
Compensation Board determined that Sandberg’s injury did not arise from her employment and denied her
benefits.
However, the state
appellate court disagreed in its ruling and ruled that Sandberg worked from home as a condition of her
employment, which benefited her employer. Therefore, her home and garage constitute her work environment and
premises, and the injury therefore arose from her employment.
If the “claimant
tripped over a dog and injured herself while meeting with a customer in the customer’s home, her injury would arise
out of her employment,” the appellate court ruled. “The same is true here because claimant was where she was, doing
what she was, because of the requirements of her employment.”data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1513b/1513bd2e3667a1fa6e479e0fcf2f5a0ca32bebd5" alt="growwwwl growwwwl"
The appeals court reversed the board and remanded the case for
reconsideration.
|