by William A. Green, Esq.

Determining the compensability of claims which happen when an employee is not at the actual employer’s location can be tricky. For instance, when an employer or staffing agency places an employee at the client location, how would the “ingress/egress” and “parking lot” exceptions apply?

It is the general rule that accidents occurring while an employee is traveling to and from work do not arise out of and in the course of employment. However, exceptions have been made to this general rule including allowing the award of benefits where the employee is going to and from parking facilities owned, controlled or maintained by the employer (known as the “parking lot exception”) and also if the injury arose during the employee’s ingress or egress from employment. Courts have ruled that the period of employment generally includes a reasonable time for ingress to and egress from the place of work, while on the employer’s premises. However, per the decision in Tate v. Brunos, Inc., in order for this exception to apply, the physical location where the injury is sustained must be owned, controlled, or maintained by the claimant’s employer.

In the independent worksite scenario, the claimant works at a physical location that is not owned, controlled, nor maintained by the employer. Therefore, it would seem that the ingress/egress exception would not apply to injuries sustained in or around the location itself. However, what if the claimant works at this facility each day, and for all intents and purposes, the location is the claimant’s place of employment? In short, if the area is owned, controlled, or maintained by the employer’s contracted client, the injury may very well be compensable

In Collie Concessions, Inc. v. Bruce, the claimant was injured in a crosswalk on her way to work as a cashier at the Masters Golf Tournament, which was an offsite location. Collie Concessions had a contract with August National Golf Club to provide concession services for the Masters Golf Tournament. Therefore, the claimant’s employment required her to work in an off-site location that was neither owned nor controlled by her employer. In this case, the court held that the ingress/egress exception did not extend to cover the claimant’s injury because the parking lot in question was not owned or leased by Augusta National Golf Club (the contracted client) or by Collie Concessions (the employer).

However, by explicitly stating that the parking lot in question was not owned or leased by Augusta National Golf Club, the court seemed to indicate that ownership or control by the contracted client could be sufficient to make the claim compensable.