Injured during motel sex, employee seeks workers’ comp
August 1, 2011 by Fred HosierPosted in: Bizarre Accident of the Week, In this week's e-newsletter, Injuries, Latest News & Views, Lawsuits, Special Report, What do you think?, Workers' comp
PDF For workers who travel as part of their jobs, workers’ compensation covers certain kinds of injuries involved with the travel itself — no question about that. Then, there’s this case …
An Australian woman who was injured while having sex on a business trip is suing her employer for workers’ compensation benefits.
The government worker, whose name has been withheld, was required to travel in Australia and stay overnight to attend a budget review meeting early the next day.
The woman suffered injuries to her nose, mouth and a tooth, as well as psychiatric injury, when a wall-mounted lamp in the motel where she was staying fell on her head during sex.
The employee’s claim is based on the assertion that she suffered the injuries “during the course of her employment” because she was required to travel.
The woman is appealing a previous decision that the sex was not an “ordinary incident of an overnight stay like showering, sleeping or eating” which would be covered for a travelling employee.
A lawyer for the government says there wasn’t enough connection between the incident and what the woman was being employed to do. The government agency she works for says the woman was having sex with “an acquaintance, who had no connection with her work.” (Would that have made a difference?)
Specifically, the government says its employee’s sexual activity was “not obviously involved” in her requirement for an overnight stay, was not of any benefit to the employer, was “a frolic of her own,” and “took her outside the course of her employment.” (Glad we cleared that up.)
The woman’s lawyer doesn’t see it that way. He said it was similar to slipping in the shower of your motel room while on a business trip.
Do you think there’s any reason this employee should receive workers’ comp benefits for her injuries? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below. (And if you’re a reader in Australia, mention that in your comment.)
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: Australia, business trip, injuries involved with travel, workers' compensation
Loading ...
August 2nd, 2011 at 6:06 am
No compensation.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:19 am
I would question whether the lamp would have fallen had she not been having sex, and if so whether she would have been in a position to have been injured by it?
If so I would say compensation should be paid; otherwise no.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:25 am
Is there no end to the madnes? Once while traveling I threw my back out tying my shoe while sitting on the motel couch! Possibly I should have sued for workers comp????? Absolutely stupid! It seems everyone wants something for nothing today.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:26 am
Is this really an issue? I would be much too embarassed to bring this situation forward as a claim. Wow!
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:35 am
Where do these people find the time to sue for something that clearly wasn’t a work comp injury? This could’ve happened anywhere but because she was travleling on business makes it a work comp injury? I don’t think so. I see where being injured while travelling for work can be compensated by clearly sex in a motel after the business day is over is not part of her duties.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:53 am
I was Safety DIrector in Australia for 2 years for an global US company.Australia is very liberal in what they award to employees as they seemingly do no wrong and it is always the ‘Tall Poppy’ that gets clipped,. I am referring to employers. However as performence during a sexual act which sounds like it was a bit rough in this case is absolutely ludicrous.
I would sincerely hope that compensation is not awarded as unresponsable behaviour, perhaps a bit kinky behaviour or even somebody acting in an investigative behaviour, trying out their fantasies while on the road, with stragers etc certainly cannot be in the course of business.
No, not this one as that is pushing the envelope to its extreme.
JHS
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:04 am
Absolutely NOT!!!! This idiotic woman (and her attorney) is nuts to think that her employer is anyway responsible for her alledged injuries.
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:37 am
Just loving this one! (pun intended) If this had been a successful claim, I forseee not only a slew of similar items, but how about someone claiming that having to travel PREVENTED them from enjoying sex with their spouse or significant other and wanting compensation for that too.
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:47 am
Of course she should…There’s a bottomless pit of money if you can figure out how to get to it. Livin’ the dream.
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:52 am
I can’t believe she had the nerve to file a claim in the first place. How embarrassing!
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:19 am
Wow.
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:23 am
wow! i would say being away from home on a business trip is a 24 hour job. you must keep a higher level of standards because your away from home representing your employer. i would rule in the employees favor.
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:28 am
So what would contracting a disease translate to? Occupational Illness? What pregnancy equal permanent partial because she has to raise a child? I know this sounds as if I’m poking fun, but if you look closely, you can see where anyone would and could find a way to get something out of this. And why wasn’t guarding and head PPE in place for an unsecured item that presented an impact risk?
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:32 am
If the ‘sex’ caused the lamp to fall off the wall, (due to headboard banging) then she should not recieve comp. If on the other hand, the lamp fell off the wall of its own volition or reasons out of her control, (faulty screw connections or slack building maintenance) then she should recieve comp. Just my opinion.
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:37 am
Of course she should be compensated! What was the root cause in the first place? The employer placed her there by way of assignment, and the idea is that the employer will provide an environment as close as possible (within reason) to the accommodations’ at home. Do we not have sex at home? Even better for the employer, it was not costing a dime for an acquaintance to accommodate her and create a more home-like environment. Pay her!
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:40 am
I think we will have to watch the video to know for sure!
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:46 am
Sounds like she has a lot more issues than just having the lamp fall on her head. You would think that maybe it would have jarred some sense into her.
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:55 am
I’m not sure of the law in Australia, but the fact that the word ‘frolic’ was used suggests that there is some distinction between frolic and detour in that country. There again frolic can be used in other than the legal sense, and that may have been intended in this case.
August 2nd, 2011 at 10:11 am
Haha @ Dennis. Good one
August 2nd, 2011 at 10:34 am
Seems like the Motel is the one who should be sued esp if room was advertised as safe sex destination
August 2nd, 2011 at 10:49 am
Only Abdijah and Kehbe got this one right. The injury was a result of a lamp falling on her head, not necessarily a direct result of having sex. If the lamp falling was a direct result of the sex, perhaps comp is not warranted. Most of the comments are knee-jerk reactions, not looking at the root cause of the accident. Are you really safety professionals? Remove the sex from the equation; is it possible (probable) that the lamp would have fallen on her had she not been having sex? The article does not provide the information necessary to make the proper determination in this case.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:00 am
I dont know about the work comp laws in Australia, but here in the states, she has clearly established a “home away from home” and once she has been relieved of her duties and is in a non-working status any injury should not be and is not covered, unless of course she is working in a manner that reflects her normal job duties, I do not think that this qualifies. i have been through a number of these cases in the states, and it is the same as if she were at her acutal home and had sustained the injury. Should work comp pay for that scenario? No, it was on her personal time, and she was not functioning in a work capacity. Granted, people have to travel for work, that does not mean that the employer should assume all accidents while they are in travel status, just the ones that happen while performing her normal job duties, and this one does not qualify. Read up on the OSHA justifications, and it is very clearly stated!
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:06 am
Ok, it’s just plain crazy that anyone would think she should be compensated!! Unless her employer is a pimp, sex is not part of any job!!
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:20 am
Well I guess we will never know the answer Wilson. In my opinion, if she wanted to make this a legitimate claim, the fact that she was having sex should not have factored into the equation. What she does on her own time in her own bed is her business. Unfortunately, now that the claim has been brought up the whole legitimacy of the claim is under question. We will never know if it’s because she was banging the headboard too hard or if the screws and brackets to hold it on the wall were loose to begin with. I do appreciate your opinion, however, it does not give you the right to criticize everyone else’s.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:23 am
Wilson, I am a safety professional. What she does on her own time in her own bed is her business. Because the fact that she was having sex came into the equation, it no longer becomes just an issue of a loose screw. How do we know it was loose? Did her head hit the wall one too many times? Her actions and admissions of her actions affect the whole legitimacy of the claim. You have a right to your opinion. Don’t criticize others for theirs.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:10 pm
OMG, clearly having sex after work isn’t part of the “scope of work”. Don’t know the workers comp laws in Australia either, but this woman & her attorney have some nerve!! Just appalling the degree people go through to try to take advantage … sickening!
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Hang on! Hang on! The article states that the woman is a government employee attending a budget review meeting. What do government employees do at budget meetings? Screw the taxpayer! Clearly, this was a work-related injury.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Isn’t their some kind of assumption of risk pertaining to making choices about activities. Sex has always been very risky… This did not come from activities stemming from employment. Sex is not compensated unless she is in the industry. I would see if she has been moonlighting without authority.. and look for a commensurate payroll deduction and taxpayer savings. To consider I would be compensated for creating my family whilst on a business trip, albeit dangerous, in non compensation. Create your family on your own time, and stay away from falling lamps while pulling the cord.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:19 pm
If she was, as she claims still functioning in a work capacity, “on the job” so to speak, then certainly she was in non-compliance with company rules regarding dress code (one can assume she was not wearing appropriate attire, if any at all) and behavioral standards (lewd and lascivious). She would certainly be terminated for having sex at work, but I guess if a lamp fell on her head while having sex on company property, she could also have a legitimate worker’s comp claim.
August 2nd, 2011 at 3:12 pm
i’m going to assume that all of us are safety professionals. Therefore, i will not criticize anyone for their opinions or jokes. Maybe she shouldn’t have skipped Motel Sex safety training 101.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:47 pm
I say, “Show me the tape” and then we will decide.
.
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:52 pm
I guess she should feel lucky… What happens if she comes up with a disease or even worse pregnant.. you think she will try to claim that as well…..where will it end??
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Was she actually holding onto the lamp while this situaiton was occuring. Was the fact of her sexual activity in the bed destructive enought to dislodge the lamp…in essence the motel could claim she caused damaged to the room from her and her “acqaintences” actions. So tell me this, does this also mean that if she had injured herself in a bar where her and the acqaintence may have met because she could claim that she had to go out to eat because she had to travel? To me she was on “her own time” not her employers. No compensation. The sharks will rule as we all know and the case will be quietly settled by the backs of the tax payers to limit the time of the lawyers in court.
August 3rd, 2011 at 9:05 am
I’m wondering if she went for worker’s comp when her suit against the motel was thrown out due to their direct contribution of the lamp falling. Basically her partner actually knocked the lamp off the wall when he reached to brace himself or something. To me seeking workers comp is easier than seeking compensation for construction failure, that’s why people do it. There’s fewer experts needed.
I just noticed that it doesn’t say she was having sex in bed……
August 3rd, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Claiming “psychiatric injury” is the big red flag to me. You got PTSD because you “frolic’d” hard enough to knock the lamp off the wall? Give me a break, she’s looking for a free ride.
August 4th, 2011 at 10:19 am
When the employee returned from the trip a presented her finding would she have mentioned she had sex if the lamp didn’t fall? Could I ask if she had sex? I paid for the trip.
August 5th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Now I have heard it all.. I would of not mentioned a damn thing about the sex. But i would go after the hotel for damages.
August 5th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
Another side note My company sent me to Montana for training with my K9 and during the course of the training I broke the top of my tibia. All my co-workers were telling me to file a workers comp claim. I was not required to assist in this exercise that involved my k9. it was after the scheduled training class and i volunteered my personal time to experience the “AFTER HOURS’ training. I could not with a clear conscience file a workers comp claim for this incident. Once again this woman should of left out the sexual encounter.
August 8th, 2011 at 3:23 am
Where is the video?
August 8th, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Everyone is missing the point here.
Mistakenly, everyone’s focus is on the “sex”, not the injury facts of the injury in reference to an employee on a company sponsored & expense paid business trip/event.
IF the woman had been asleep in her company sponsored & approved hotel room (proof given that the company sponsored/approved of said hotel by paying for the expenses of hotel stay during this incident on this business trip), by herself, by a falling light fixture in that hotel room… would she then be allowed worker compensation?
Obviously she was on a company approved/sponsored & reimbursed business trip/event & had she NOT been on the said company sponsored & expense paid business trip/event, she would NOT had been injured by that light fixture in that hotel room, regardless if she had been alone & asleep or having sex.
I realize that she was not asleep but having sex. Does that really deter from the aspect of injury while on a company sponsored & expense paid business trip/event? What if this was with her spouse whom she had prior approval to be on the trip with her @ the time? Does that still disqualify her from worker compensation or does this make it “acceptable” & thus the company is responsible for worker compensation? Does “social” opinion of the behavior have influence of the behavior involved here on whether the company is liable for worker compensation or not?
So, is a company @ risk of being required to pay a worker compensation for any injuries sustained by an employee while traveling on approved company business? It can be argued that the employee would not have sustained said hypothetical injuries if he/she were not on company business.
Also, when does an employee’s time apply when traveling on company approved/sponsored business? I am NOT addressing work time for hours charged to the company for payroll/salary but addressing the issue of liability time of the employee to the company & the company to the employee?
Another…
August 9th, 2011 at 10:38 am
She does not have a case with her employer but would win in a suite against the hotel since she clearly had to be laying on the floor for the lamp to fall and hit her in the face. It had not been properly secured, stupidity wins everytime..
August 9th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Scuttles gets it right. Her beef is with the hotel not her employer. They probably have liability insurance for accidents on the property. But it may not pay as much as workers comp. Or she may want to sue them for more if she is awarded workers comp. Did she go to a hospital and seek medical attention? If so, did she tell the doctor it was a workers comp accident at that time? In any event doubt that she’ll get any more assignments requiring travel.
August 10th, 2011 at 9:06 am
It seems to me she should have sued the motel for faulty equipment rather than go the workers compensation route. The award would have been much higher and she would not be put through the crap that WC insurers require you to do to receive their benifits.
August 11th, 2011 at 7:29 pm
@ TJ, you sound like an employee I wouldn’t want to have working for me. You are so stuck on the point of “company approved/sponsored & reimbursed business trip/event” that you are missing the points of “injury while performing work for the company”, “injured during the job”, “injured while performing tasks w/in her scope of work”, I mean, we could go on here. However, that is what WC is for. So, you’re saying, if while sleeping she moves the wrong way in bed, injures her back, she should be entitled to worker’s comp because she is on a “company approved/sponsored & reimbursed business trip/event.” Give me a break! She was off the clock, sex or not, she’s off the clock!! She should have sued the hotel/motel she stayed at.
August 17th, 2011 at 8:41 am
Another thing comes to mind. Was she working for herself as a prostitute behind the companies back? You know, maybe to fulfill some kind of fantasy. No comp. no matter what the reason.
August 24th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
Just wondering. While working for a large company when receiving the travel docs,tickets, time schedules etc, for a company sponsored business trip there was also a clause saying we were not allowed to be drinking alcohol while on the trip as we are representing the company.Does this imply that we are on the job for the whole duration of the trip 24 hours a day until we are back at the main office?Does this make the company liable for any accident that could occur anytime during the duration of the trip?
August 24th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Ha! Ha! WOW… She should sue the motel and not her employer….
September 13th, 2011 at 11:07 am
I always wanted to be injured during sex.