HE Supreme Court has a unified doctrine that affirms that if a person leaves work during a break, goes to a bar for a snack and falls on the way, that fall has been taken into account (and additional protection) by an official. work accident. That was ruled out in a recent ruling published this Monday, but dated February 9, in which senior judges consider the crash to have the category of ‘on the road’, which characterizes accidents on the way from home to work. On the way home from work or during breaks as confirmed by this latest decision. total in Spain in 2022 79,551 workers who had an accident ‘on the road’ resulting in a medical leave.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the worker MalagaTaking the opportunity to take the break during the working day, 1,500 workers went on leave by falling to a bar about 60 meters from the workplace and falling before reaching there. temporary disability. And denies mutual claims asepiowho want it to be Social Security, not the ones who will bear some of the leave costs.
What is a work accident and what is not is subject to repeated interpretation in the courts. In this sense, the Supreme Court has unified its doctrine on pauses. popularly known assandwich break‘, a multi-arranged break Collective agreements It is also working time that provides a rest time for workers to stop and rest during the working day. Although the employees were not actively working at the time, they are renewing their strength to continue working after the agreed break.
And while this ‘sandwich break’ is classified as working time, any event occurring during this time can be considered working time. Including accidents. What entitles the worker to treatment and intervention, inter alia, through the work reciprocal system, which often shortens times?
Doctrine unification
Mutually Asepeyo argued that during the process, the fall could not be considered as a work accident since it did not occur in the workplace and the employee was not in a workplace. labor mission, but went out alone during the lunch break. However, the Supreme Court magistrates consider that there is a direct relationship between the accident and the worker’s employment relationship, although the accident occurred during the ‘bocadillo break’ during the worker’s working day.
And he likens it to an accident where a worker has to drive to the parking lot to get something out of the car during his break, slip on the road and need a permit. Already in April 2021, the same Supreme Court had decided that the fall of a worker in a cafeteria while taking a break was also considered an ‘on-the-road’ work accident.
“The circumstances surrounding the case indicate that the accident was caused by work, occurring during the period of work that the worker can use to regain his strength – a purpose pursued along with the rest whose time qualifies as work. Social court judges, who said, “This would not have happened if they did not provide services, because it is not necessary to leave the center for this purpose in a way that breaks the connection between the accident and work, should be understood as a normal working life activity”.