2024-01-07 02:45:33
The courts will analyze in each case whether the worker’s recklessness affected the accident to or from work, and it will no longer be considered a work accident if it is reckless.
This will be the analysis that the courts must carry out in each case of a work accident in itinere, which is what the accidents suffered by the worker are called when they are on their way to work, or returning from work. These accidents that occur during the worker’s travel are considered occupational accidents, and the worker receives a benefit from Social Security, always greater than that received for a common illness or non-occupational accident.
The Supreme Court, in a ruling dated July 4, 2023, leaves aside automatism and generality, laying the foundation for the need to analyze each specific case to determine if the worker committed any recklessness. If it has been committed, the courts must examine whether it was reckless, and whether it affected the achievement of the accident. If answered affirmatively, the accident could no longer be considered a work accident.
The crux of the issue will be to define what is meant by reckless imprudence, since in the criminal field this recklessness must be of greater intensity than in the workplace, taking into account the penalty to be imposed for the commission of a crime. Reckless will be the behaviors in which manifest, unnecessary and especially serious risks are assumed, that is, a patent and clear disregard for risk and the most basic prudence required.
This is precisely what happens in the sentence handed down, since the worker crossed the road at night, with four two-way lanes that separated the airport from the vehicle, without a reflective vest, in an unlicensed place, with packages and without direct lighting. However, mere traffic violations are not if they are not accompanied by other circumstances (think, for example, driving under the influence of alcohol, or extreme speeding on roads without visibility), but the catalog of behaviors must be be eminently casuistic, with the courts being the ones that outline what behaviors involve the assumption of unnecessary risks and the absolute lack of prudence.
The consequences for the worker are obvious, because while the work accident has a recognized benefit of 100% of the regulatory base of the salary, the non-work accidents are 75%, which invites reflection before taking unnecessary risks when going or return from work, leaving aside the rush that can end up playing tricks. Elena Fraile Lafuente. She is a Territorial Assignment judge based in Santa Cruz de Tenerife.
#reckless #imprudence #worker #accident #cost #benefit #workrelated #accident #Health #Medicine