If a worker falls down on a slippery road in a snowy day on the way to and from work, resulting in self-injury, should the work-related injury be recognized if the traffic management department is unable to issue a "Certificate of Accident Liability" or a "Certificate of Accident Liability" without determining whether the employee is primarily responsible?Slipping and falling to and from work is not considered a work injury
At 8:17 a.m. on March 15, 2019, Wang, an employee of a certain unit, was on his way to work on a shared bicycle normally, but due to the snow and slippery road the day before, he accidentally fell down when turning at an intersection, resulting in a fracture of his right tibia and fibula. Later, the employer applied for a work-related injury determination, but the work-related injury insurance administrative department refused to recognize the work-related injury on the grounds that it did not provide a conclusion on the traffic accident.
On April 9, 2019, at the request of Wang, the public security traffic police department issued the "Traffic Accident Liability Determination" after verifying the situation on the day, stating "......Wang drove a shared bicycle and fell down while making a right turn at an intersection, resulting in a leg injury ......"Responsibility for the accident has not been divided and determined. In this regard, the administrative department of work-related injury insurance believes that the determination of responsibility issued by the public security traffic police department recorded that Wang fell down by himself, and did not make a determination of responsibility, and still refused to identify the work-related injury.
In this regard, Wang was not satisfied, and finally triggered this lawsuit.
During the trial, Wang insisted that the cause of the accident was that it had snowed the night before, the ground was slippery, and the road was narrow, and many people had fallen here at the same time, and the result of his fall and injury was not caused by his main responsibility, and should be recognized as a work-related injury in accordance with the law.
After trial, the court held that the determination of "not the main responsibility of the person" should generally be made by the public security traffic police department through the determination of accident responsibility, but if the public security traffic police department did not make a determination of accident responsibility or could not make a determination of accident responsibility due to objective reasons, the administrative department of work-related injury insurance could not refuse to make a determination of work-related injury or directly determine that it did not constitute a work-related injury on the grounds that there was no determination of accident responsibility, but should investigate and verify the accident injury involved, and determine whether it is a "situation that is not the main responsibility of the person." "Make a determination. At the same time, in the process of determining liability, the administrative department of work-related injury insurance shall follow the legislative intent of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance to protect the legitimate rights and interests of employees injured due to work, and make a presumption in favor of employees if there is a lack of evidence to prove the relevant facts affecting the determination of liability and the specific liability issues are difficult to ascertain.
In this case, the administrative department of work-related injury insurance failed to prove that the accident involved in the case was caused by Wang's subjective intention or gross negligence, failed to investigate the relevant facts affecting the determination of accident liability, such as the road conditions and the weather at the time of the accident, and did not verify the narrowness of the road, the slippery road surface and the multiple falling accidents on the road section mentioned by Wang In this case, it is not recognized as a work-related injury, which lacks factual and legal basis, and violates the legislative intent of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" to protect workers injured on the job.
In summary, the court finally revoked the Decision on Not Recognizing Work-related Injuries made by the administrative department of work-related injury insurance and required it to make a new decision within a time limit.
Others have no intention, so why force them to blame!In the case that the traffic police department has not made a determination of responsibility, if the worker has no obvious fault such as drinking alcohol and driving without a license, it is presumed to be "not the main responsibility of the person", which is indeed more in line with the original intent of the legislation, after all, the law should not force a person to be harshly punished.
If an employee fails to write a work diary as required, can the employer "legally" terminate the employment contract?
Is it legal for the purchaser to purchase materials and the company to dismiss him on the grounds of economic losses
The company "turned over old accounts" and reduced salaries, and employees were forced to leave their jobs to claim compensation, which of the two is more "reasonable"?