Does Workers’ Comp Cover Injuries Suffered During a Meal Break?
Workers’ compensation provides benefits for workers who suffer injuries that “arise out of” or “in the course of” their employment. This language clearly applies to injuries that occur while workers are operating machinery, lifting loads and performing other work-related tasks. But what if a worker is hurt during a meal break? Does such an injury arise out of and in the course of the worker’s employment? Stated differently, is the injury considered work-related? Here are two cases in which courts and tribunals came to different conclusions on this issue. (Although one case involves a federal disability pension rather than workers’ comp benefits, it involves the same issues and analysis that are used to determine if an injury is work-related under workers’ comp.)
INJURY IS WORK-RELATED
FACTS
A poultry processing plant had an onsite store where it sold chicken to the public. During a very busy day, a worker who was part of the staff that ran the store was finally able to take his lunch break. He sat down in the store and ate his lunch. When he was done, he stood up and felt severe pain in his lower back. He immediately reported the incident to his supervisor. The next day, the worker’s doctor diagnosed him with a lumbosacral sprain. The worker applied for workers’ comp benefits, but his claim was denied on the grounds that the injury wasn’t work-related. So he appealed.
DECISION
The Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal ruled that the worker’s injury was work-related and so he was entitled to workers’ comp benefits.
EXPLANATION
The Tribunal explained that whether the worker’s injury was work-related depended on:
Where the injury occurred. The worker was injured at his place of employment on the plant’s premises.
When the injury occurred. The worker was entitled to a half-hour lunch break each day. He couldn’t choose the precise time to take this break; he was allowed to eat lunch only during a quiet period in the store. The worker was injured at the end of his lunch break during his normal working hours. So the timing of the injury supported the argument that it happened in the course of the worker’s employment.
What the worker was doing when he was injured. The worker was injured when, at the end of his lunch break, he got up from his chair to return to work. The Tribunal concluded that taking lunch on work premises was an “activity reasonably incidental to the worker’s employment” and that standing up in these circumstances was a work-related activity.
Decision No. 1147/07, [2007] ONWSIAT 1881 (CanLII), July 18, 2007.
INJURY ISN’T WORK-RELATED
FACTS
A sergeant in the military police was assigned to a rapid deployment unit stationed in an unmarked warehouse. The unit got an order to be ready for deployment. The sergeant believed that her unit would be deployed right away and so expected to work late supervising the preparations. Because the warehouse didn’t have dining facilities, she drove in her own vehicle to get dinner at a nearby drive-through restaurant, intending to return to work. While waiting at a red light, her car was rear-ended and she suffered whiplash. The sergeant applied for a disability pension. But her claim was denied on the grounds that her injury didn’t arise out of and wasn’t directly connected to her military service. The sergeant appealed.
DECISION
A federal court ruled that the sergeant’s injury wasn’t related to her military service and so she wasn’t entitled to a disability pension.
EXPLANATION
The court explained that whether the sergeant’s injury arose out of or was directly connected to her military service depended on:
Where the injury occurred. The sergeant was injured in her personal vehicle on a public road outside of her workplace. Whether the sergeant was on duty at the time. The sergeant was on duty at the time of the traffic accident, the court acknowledged.
What the sergeant was doing when she was injured. Even though the sergeant was on duty when the accident occurred, she hadn’t been ordered to work late or to take a meal at all, much less to go to that particular restaurant. She made the decision on her own to leave the warehouse to get dinner. And although an injury is considered to be connected to military service if it occurs in the course of “an established military custom or practice,” the unit’s practice of leaving the warehouse to get meals and then return to work didn’t rise to that level, the court concluded.
Fournier v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] FC 453 (CanLII), April 6, 2005
Loading ...
