Holiday party season is upon us! Work holiday parties, often outside of the office and outside of normal business hours, bring the joy of celebrating the holidays with co-workers and employees, but also bring risk – risk of injuries to employees. When those parties are considered an extension of the workplace for the purposes of Pennsylvania workers’ compensation law, injured employees may be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits.
In Pennsylvania, an employee is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits when the injury in question occurs in the course and scope of employment. An injury may be deemed in the course and scope of employment, whether on or off the employer’s premises, when the injured employee is actually engaged in the furtherance of the employer’s business or affairs. An injury may also be deemed to be in the course and scope of employment when an employee is not actually engaged in the furtherance of the employer’s business but, (1) is on the premises occupied or under the control of the employer, or upon which the employer’s business or affairs are being carried on; (2) is required by the nature of his or her employment to be present at said location; (3) and the injury is caused by the condition of the premises or by operation of the employer’s business or affairs thereon.[1]
Injuries that take place outside of an employer’s premises, like many holiday parties, can be deemed to be in the course of employment when an employee “is injured while actually engaged in the furtherance of the employer’s business or affairs.” [2]
Whether any activity is within the course and scope of employment is a factual matter, decided on a case-by-case basis. Holiday parties are treated like any other activity; a factual determination must be made for each event as to whether an employee injured at such an event is eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. Presence at an off premises social event, in and of itself, does not mean that an employee is furthering an employer’s interests at that event. Pennsylvania courts consider whether the employer encouraged attendance at an event as well as whether the event furthered a specific interest of the employer in deciding whether an employee attending a social event is “engaged in furtherance of the employer’s business or affairs.”[3]
First, courts examine whether the employer encouraged the activity in question. Where an employer encouraged employees to participate in an off premises social event by posting notices at the workplace, supplying food, or traditionally holding such events on a regular basis, courts have found that the employer encouraged attendance at the event.[4] Where no such encouragement was found, courts have declined to find that the employee is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits.[5]
Second, courts question whether attendance at the social event furthered a specific interest of the employer. For the purposes of holiday parties, it is important to note that social events that sustain company morale, promote camaraderie and foster positive relationships among employees have been found to meet an employers’ specific interest.[6] Assuming that the facts otherwise support a finding that the employer encouraged attendance at a holiday party, it seems that the burden on a claimant to demonstrate an employer’s interests in employee attendance will not be difficult to meet.
As this discussion relates to holiday parties, however, we must also consider the role of intoxication in workers’ compensation benefit determinations. The Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act excludes from coverage injuries that result from the illegal use of drugs or would not have occurred but for the intoxication of the employee.[7] Here, the burden of proof is on the employer, so that the employer must demonstrate the employee’s intoxication for the injury to been deemed noncompressible.
The determination of intoxication, like the analyzation of the scope of employment discussed above, is undertaken on a case-by-case basis. Courts look to blood alcohol levels, medical testimony, and eye-witness testimony to conclude whether the employee’s intoxication caused the injury at hand.[8] As holiday parties approach, employer and employees must be aware of the issues to be considered in the intoxication and scope of employment analyses.
Celebrate safely! Wishing you a happy holiday season!
[1] See Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Slaugenhaupt) v. U.S. Steel Corp., 376 A.2d 271 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1977).
[2] Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act Section 301 (c)(1).
[3] See Meshoppen Transp., Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd., No. 334 C.D. 2018, 5 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 2018); Pinn v.
Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd., 754 A.2d 44 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
[4] See, e.g., Hemmler v. Workermens’ Comp. Appeal Bd. 569 A.2d 395 (Pa. Comwlth. 1990); Feaster v. S.K. Kelso
Sons, 347 A.2d 521 (Pa. Comwlth. 1975); Tredyffrin Easttown School District v. Breyer 408 A.2d 1194 (Pa. Comwlth.
1979).
[5] See, e.g., Pinn v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd., 754 A.2d 40 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000)
[6] See, e.g., Investors Diversified Services v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Bd. (Howar), 520 A.2d 958 (Pa.
Comwlth. 1987); Tredyffrin-Easttown School District v. Breyer; Feaster v. S.K. Kelso Sons.
[7] Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act Section 301 (a).
[8] See, e.g., Thomas Lindstrom Co. v. WCAB (Braun), 992 A.2d 961 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010); Mahon v. WCAB (Expert
Window Cleaning) 835 A.2d 420 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003).
X
