Maybe this mindset is a typical European court mindset. Anything possible that might be slightly related to work or where someone mentioned work, work is liable. Even if die in the arms of a prostitute while, clearly not working or engaged in work sanctioned activities, but still on business travel.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d3669d9d-8498...
The ruling is Florida like in that it's absolutely insane. There's no indication that the place of employment purchased or rents out space in this person's house. So the ruling is saying that when you work from home all workplace safety standards need to be met because work is liable for any injury caused. This means that the employer now has cause to inspect and ensure that your home environment meets all workplace safety standards as they are liable for any violations or injury from that. Apparently that means that at any time the employer can enter the premises and determine the path from the bed to the office is clear and free of obstacles and obstructions. Additionally that would mean that if they find that the person places obstacles and obstructions in the path they could be disciplined by the employer for creating an unsafe work environment.
Or this is just another Court ruling on a money grab scheme that makes no sense. Because if this does not imply that the employer can enter the premises to determine safety and quality of the work environment then the court has placed a burden on the employer that it has no ability to mitigate. Therefore it's set up for a prime money grab.
If you cannot see the abject insanity of this ruling then I'm not sure how it can be pointed out to you.
I'm sure this is exactly the same issue at play.
