September 25, 2006

Think twice about mandating extracurricular activities

Is an injury that occurs as the result of a dive at a swimming hole a compensable injury? It is if swimming is one of the activities at a mandatory company-sponsored event. Roberto Ceniceros of Business Insurance alerted us to a recent ruling by the Arkansas Court of Appeals in the case of Tina Engle vs. Thompson Murray Inc. and Continental Casualty Co.. Ms. Engle was injured while diving at a company retreat, a team-building exercise. An administrative law judge had originally denied the claim, finding that the employee was not at work at the time of the injury. The Appeals court disagreed, finding in favor of the employee.

An article from the Arkansas News Bureau tells us that Ms. Engle had the responsibility of organizing the off-site company activity, which included pontoon boat rides and a place for employees to climb rock and jump into the water.

"The purpose of the off-site meeting was for employees to bond, refresh, set new goals and have fun," Crabtree wrote. "As long as the participants were advancing the purpose of the meeting, they were furthering the interest of their employer."
Crabtree said it "defies reason to assert that (Engle) was required by her employer to find a place from which to jump, but was not expected to participate in the jumping."
Engle "was engaging in conduct permitted and participated by the employer; therefore, it was erroneous for the commission to conclude that (Engle) was not engaged in employment services because the employer did not expressly direct (Engle) to jump from the cliff," Crabtree wrote."

This concept of advancing or furthering the interests of the employer is one that surfaces frequently as a determining factor whether an employee should be compensated for injuries that occur outside the normal place or time of work. Does the employer derive some benefit from the performance of the activity? What we refer to as "mandatory fun" - activities that an employer requires - are generally found compensable, even when they involve riding around in go-karts. If you don't want to own any resulting injuries, think twice about requiring the activity.

| 3 Comments

3 Comments

this is a great article. i used to be an assistant at a w.c law firm. we believe that if you were AT the work site at the time of the injury.. it IS w.c related. Thanks for showing proof that we're not the only people out there that believe so.

Can anyone provide a link to the actual opinion at Ark. Court of Appeals?

Subscribe

Submit your email to be notified when this site is updated

Need help with your workers' comp program?

Monthly Archives

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Julie Ferguson published on September 25, 2006 9:27 AM.

America's Great Wall: A Modest Proposal was the previous entry in this blog.

Health Wonk Review is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID