Hypotheticals Using the Dual Purpose Doctrine

Tampa, FL (WorkersCompensation.com) - Many of us are aware of the going and coming rule: the concept that says that accidents occur while the employee is going to or coming from work are not compensable. But there are several exceptions to the going and coming rule that can make it not applicable to any given accident.

One exception is the dual purpose doctrine. This exception to the going and coming rule says that even though a claimant may have received some personal benefit from engaging in a specific activity, if the activity also provided a benefit to the employer, than the going and coming rule will not apply and the claim can be compensable.

The dual purpose doctrine is applicable in some, but not all states. It is a doctrine that can cause exposure on files to rise, because a file might look like it has a good reason for detail at the outset but other details are then later discovered which reveal the applicability of the dual purpose doctrine. A discussion of some situations where the dual purpose doctrine might apply may assist adjusters in ruling out the exception to properly deny a claim.

Let’s take an example of an injured worker who is going to a training seminar for their license used to do work. Some would argue that they are receiving a personal benefit for assisting their license because they need to maintain it even if they left the employer and worked for someone else. However, the employer benefits from the license being maintained, so this could potentially serve a dual purpose.

Another situation could be if a worker is going to renew their vehicle registration. One could argue that if the vehicle is used for exclusive personal use, then this is not something that benefits the employer. However, if the employee uses their car for business purposes, keeping the vehicle registration valid could be seen as a dual purpose activity.

Another situation could be when an employer directs a worker to buy food for the group. The employee would ostensibly be buying food for themselves, but there is also the benefit to the employer because the worker is carrying out a direct command from the employer.

An employer-provided physical examination could also run the risk of being covered under the dual purpose doctrine. Here, the worker is receiving a personal benefit to their health by the exam. However, the employer is also receiving a benefit by insuring that they have healthy employees, which provides stability to their company.

The dual purpose doctrine can be said to be a defense to a defense. In other words, it is a defense that would be raised in a pre-trial stipulation in response to the defense raised by the employer/carrier that the accident did not occur within the course and scope of employment. The burden would be on the claimant to show applicability of the dual purpose doctrine to the industrial accident.

Share This Article: