undefined | Better HN

0 pointselmerfud4y ago0 comments

This is where I think you're misunderstanding the ruling. Work is liable, but work has insurance to cover the liability. So the employer is covering it by means of their insurance that's what insurance does it covers liability.

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.

0 comments

fy204y ago

The same insurance would also cover the employee if they were commuting from their home to an office, and slipped on ice and broke their back. Should the company also make sure that whatever routes their employees take to work are deemed safe? Maybe they should mandate employees take certain routes?

riedel4y ago

On work place safety I theoretically have to submit a sketch of my home work place and e.g. also need to bring in cables for electrical testing. Yes my employer is generally responsible for a risk assessment (here in Germany) Actually a covid home office risk assessment guidelines provided by such a work place insurer even provided guidelines to account for the mental health effects of being put into home office. For the drive to work, insurance covers the direct path including bringing kids to school or kindergarten. Actually I once had to draw a map that very much detailed the route I have taken because I had a bike accident. Also in hospital you typically will be asked to detail that the accident was on your way to your work after that everything will be automatically handled by the employers insurance. I think the ruling just strengthens the existing system.

smorgusofborg4y ago

Here in Switzerland, if you work more than 8 hours a week your employer is simply responsible for all accident insurance, working less they can buy limited coverage leaving you to buy your own for off hours.

Health insurance is about 20X more expensive than accident and is none of your employers business so I'm not sure why Americans are fussing.

detaro4y ago

The employer isn't even involved in the court case (or if they are, as a witness, not as the target). The insured is the employee, the insurance is the public insurance body responsible for employees of their employer. The employee sued the insurance, because the insurance is by law responsible to cover it, there is no situation where the employer has to directly bear liability for commute accidents. Speaking of "the employers insurance" is misleading here, because the employer is not the one being insured! It's explicitly not liability insurance for the employer, but insurance for the employee.

(I guess a vaguely similar scenario in non-public schemes would be if the employer decides to buy some kind of extra insurance for their employees as a benefit, like international travel insurance for their holidays. The employer pays the insurance fees, but the insured person is the employee and if they get injured, they don't get to sue their employer either)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse