Thread Content
Case Review: Chen is an employee of a certain company. In October 2014, Chen walked from his residence to work at the company. While passing over a bridge, he encountered a collision between two cargo ships beneath it, which caused the bridge to collapse; Chen fell into the water from the bridge and suffered a fracture in his lumbar spine. Afterward, Chen submitted an application for work-related injury recognition to the local social insurance administration department. After conducting an investigation, the department decided, in accordance with Article 14, Item (6) of the Regulations on Work-Related Injury Insurance, not to recognize Chen’s injury as a work-related injury. Chen disagreed and filed an administrative lawsuit with the local people’s court. After reviewing the case at both the first and second instances, the court upheld the decision made by the social insurance administration department to deny Chen the status of an employee injured at work. Case Analysis: Article 14, Paragraph (6) of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance stipulates that \"in cases where an employee is injured in a traffic accident, or an accident involving urban rail transit, passenger ferries, or trains, while on his or her way to or from work, and the employee is not primarily at fault for such accident, it shall be recognized as a work-related injury.\" ” Under the provisions of this paragraph, “injuries resulting from urban rail transit, passenger ferries, and train accidents” and “traffic accidents” are presented as two separate categories, indicating that the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance do not extend the scope of “traffic accidents” to include “accidents on railways, tracks, and waterways”. Furthermore, as defined in Paragraph 5 of Article 119 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China, a \"traffic accident\" refers to an incident in which personal injuries or property damage occur on a road due to fault or accident involving vehicles. In this case, Chen was involved in an accident while walking on a bridge; the injuries he sustained were neither resulting from a traffic accident nor from an accident involving a passenger ferry. Conclusion: In summary, the local social insurance administration department’s decision not to recognize Chen’s injury as a work-related injury is in compliance with legal provisions. The parties may apply to the local people’s court for civil compensation in accordance with the law.
It seems I need to be careful when going out – disasters can strike out of nowhere, and they still won’t pay...
The Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance should have been revised long ago. When someone gets hit by a car while on their way to work, it’s considered a work-related injury, but if they fall from a bridge, it isn’t – it’s really outrageous! Experts, please explain why this is the case
It should be considered a traffic accident; the collision with a boat on the water was the main cause of the incident.
Laws and regulations still need further improvement
Social security and court decisions seem really shameless.
Exploiting loopholes in the law – there are gaps everywhere.
People are injured, and that’s not even the worst of it! A bit picky!