Workers’ Compensation and the “Going and Coming Rule”

Workers’ Compensation and the “Going and Coming Rule”

Workers’ compensation systems are designed to provide medical care and wage replacement benefits to employees who suffer injuries that occur during the course of their employment. Injuries that happen when an employee is traveling to and from work can become challenging to determine who is responsible for the harm caused. The “going and coming rule” is a principle that ultimately denies workers’ compensation to employees for injuries caused during the commute to work. Understanding the “going and coming rule” is essential in making sure you are aware of your rights and when to seek compensation for injuries that may arise during periods of travel. 

What Is the Going and Coming Rule?

“The going and coming rule” is a regulation that does consider injuries that have occurred while an employee is traveling to and from work to fall under workers’ compensation laws. This is harmful to victims who have suffered injuries during their commute to work. The following are examples of risks that can contribute to injuries while an employee is traveling. 

• Traffic accidents
• Severe weather conditions
• Road hazards 

Key Exceptions to the Going and Coming Rule

1. The “Special Mission” or “Special Errand” Exception

The special mission or special errand exception occurs when an employer asks an employee to perform a task outside the employee’s normal work routine. Examples of this may include the following. 

• Picking up work materials before arriving at the office
• Delivering documents to another location
• Attending an off-site meeting at the employer’s request

If an injury occurs during these periods, then the employer may be held accountable for the damage caused to the employee. 

2. The “Required Vehicle” Exception

Employees who are expected to use a personal vehicle for their work duties may have the opportunity to tie their commute to their employment rather than a personal activity. 

3. Employer-Provided Transportation

Another exception may apply when the employer provides transportation for their employees. This can include:

• Company buses or vans transporting workers to job sites
• Employer-arranged carpool systems
• Company vehicles used for commuting

4. The “Compensated Travel Time” Exception

If employees are paid for the time they spend traveling, that travel may be considered part of their work duties. For example:

• Employees who are paid for travel between job sites
• Workers who are compensated for commute time to remote locations
• Situations where travel time is included in paid working hours

5. The “Commercial Traveler” Doctrine

The commercial traveler doctrine often applies to employees whose jobs require significant travel. This may include sales representatives, traveling consultants, or field technicians. Employees who may be traveling for business purposes may be considered to be within the course of employment for much of the trip. 

6. The “Premises Line” Exception

The premises line exception addresses injuries that occur on property controlled by the employer. This is because an employer has a duty to maintain reasonably safe property conditions for workers. Examples of this can include injuries occurring in:

• Company parking lots
• Employer-owned sidewalks or walkways
• Entry areas leading to the workplace

7. The “Dual Purpose” Doctrine

The dual-purpose doctrine applies when a trip serves both personal and work-related intentions. An employee who becomes injured during the travel period may be eligible for compensation even if the trip included a personal endeavor. 

8. The “Special Hazard” Exception

In addition, the “special hazard” exception may arise when employees encounter a particular hazard that is closely associated with their employment. This may occur when:

• The workplace location requires employees to cross a dangerous intersection
• The only route to the workplace exposes employees to unusual risks
• A hazard exists that is directly tied to accessing the worksite

If the employment conditions create or require exposure to a particular hazard during the commute, some jurisdictions may allow workers’ compensation claims.

Evaluating Travel-Related Workers’ Compensation Claims

Claims involving the “going and coming rule” are often highly fact-specific. Courts and workers’ compensation boards may examine a variety of factors, including the following. 

• Whether the travel benefited the employer
• Whether the employer exercised control over the travel
• Whether the travel was part of the employee’s job responsibilities
• Whether the employee was performing a work-related task at the time of injury

How Legal Guidance May Help

Legal guidance may help victims who have suffered injuries during periods of travel to and from work understand their rights and responsibilities for the future of their claim. The proper legal support and care can provide victims with the knowledge they need to proceed with their case. A legal professional may explain applicable laws, evaluate the case, and identify potentially liable parties. 

How KAASS LAW Can Help 

KAASS LAW understands the challenges victims and their families may face when dealing with workers’ compensation laws and the “going and coming rule.” Our experienced attorneys may preserve the necessary documentation, speak with insurance companies, and provide guidance to victims ultiamtely allowing them to focus on recovering from their injuries. If you have suffered injuries from traveling during work, call KAASS LAW today.