Shannon v. Roane Med. Ctr. (Summary)

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION AND ON-CALL

Shannon v. Roane Med. Ctr., No. E2011-02649-WC-R3-WC (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. Panel Mar. 13, 2013)

A Tennessee appellate court held that a surgical technician (“surgical tech”) was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for an injury suffered during her commute home from the hospital while providing on-call services.  In addition to her regular hours, the surgical tech was required to work on-call shifts for the hospital for designated periods of time. The surgical tech had been called back to the hospital late at night following the end of her regular shift, performed her duties during a surgical procedure, and was traveling back to her home when she was seriously injured in an automobile accident.  She suffered extensive injuries, was eventually terminated by the hospital for exhausting her leave benefits, and sued to obtain workers’ compensation benefits.  The trial court denied recovery, finding that an injury sustained while traveling to or from a place of employment was not compensable.

On appeal, the only issue was whether being injured while on call constituted an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment.  The appellate court found that the injury certainly arose from the surgical tech’s employment, because she would not have been driving home at 2:30 a.m. but for answering a call.  The court also held that the nature of the on-call responsibilities that the surgical tech was providing were an exception from the general rule that an employee is not acting within the course of her employment when traveling to or from work.  In arriving at that conclusion, the court considered several factors:  (1) whether the surgical tech was compensated for time spent on call; (2) any restrictions imposed by the hospital during on-call hours; (3) the extent to which the hospital benefited from the on-call system; and (4) the extent to which the on-call system required additional travel that subjected the surgical tech to greater risk than that to which an ordinary commuter would be subjected.

In assessing these factors, the court held that the surgical tech was within the course of her employment during her commute noting that she was paid an hourly wage for the time spent on call, that the hospital placed several restrictions on the surgical tech during on-call service, requiring that she remain in contact via pager, that she stay within thirty minutes’ travel time of the hospital, and that she otherwise remain alert, and that the travel was mostly for the benefit of the hospital, allowing it to maintain operating room services on a full-time basis.  As a result, the court determined that the surgical tech was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits.