Worker compensation
Work compensation benefits are entitled to an injured worker only when the injury arose out of and during the course of employment. The initial section of this requirement, “arising out of employment”, means that there has to be a clear connection between the injury and the duties performed by the worker. The worker has to show that the employment provided additional exposure to the risk that caused the injury. Commercial law has tried heavy to define arising out of concept but there is still not streamlined definition. Instead it has related the concept to insurance policies through the 10th cir. 1998 which relates rising out of to mean growing out of or originating from which assist in relating insurance and provision. In determining if the injury will be compensated, the fourth categories of risk assist in identifying the risk cause. The first category is risks directly related to employment, the second are risks personal to the worker’s character and third is risks neither distinctly employment not distinctly personal in relation to the worker’s character and finally the fourth category of risk which is risks of neutral nature which strictly depend on facts relating to the risk.
Workers’ compensation is referred to as no fault compensation, due to the fact that compensation is usually issued by the insurance company regardless of who is at fault for the accident. Further, in addition to compensating for injury, the approach usually emphasizes on the need to minimize litigation costs that would otherwise be incurred in using the judicial process, hence the lack of interest in where the fault lies. Such compensation is therefore usually offered without needing to prove fault. This approach to workers compensation is very important, because a look at previous worker’s law approaches demonstrates a historical failure of other alternatives. The importance of history in the development of laws governing worker compensation cannot be understated, more so common law, which have set precedent for current approaches. For instance, Martin v. the Wabash railroad set an important precedent for contributory negligence, the Priestly v. Fowler case when it came to The Fellow Servant Rule. The Assumption of risk is also an important common law principle that continues to influence approaches to workers’ compensation to date.
