An EE, not paid for mileage, going to the bank on his lunch break to cash his paycheck, had an injury, the injury is:

An EE, not paid for mileage, going to the bank on his lunch break to cash his paycheck, had an injury, the injury is:

• A. Compensable because of the personal comfort doctrine.
• B. Compensable because of the going and coming rule.
• C. Not compensable because it was solely a personal errand.
• D. Not compensable because of the personal comfort doctrine.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is that workers’ compensation covers injuries that occur in the course of employment or during activities that are reasonably incidental to performing the job or benefiting the employer. In this scenario, going to the bank on a lunch break to cash a paycheck is a purely personal errand, not something the employer required or benefited from. Because the trip is for the employee’s own financial matter and not for work duties, the injury occurred outside the scope of employment and is not compensable. The personal comfort doctrine would apply only if the activity were reasonably necessary for the employee’s comfort or convenience in the course of performing work. Cashing a paycheck during a lunch break isn’t a job-related comfort activity, so that doctrine doesn’t support compensation here. Likewise, the going-and-coming rule addresses injuries on the way to and from work; a private errand during a break does not fall under that rule in a way that would make the injury compensable.

The key idea is that workers’ compensation covers injuries that occur in the course of employment or during activities that are reasonably incidental to performing the job or benefiting the employer. In this scenario, going to the bank on a lunch break to cash a paycheck is a purely personal errand, not something the employer required or benefited from. Because the trip is for the employee’s own financial matter and not for work duties, the injury occurred outside the scope of employment and is not compensable.

The personal comfort doctrine would apply only if the activity were reasonably necessary for the employee’s comfort or convenience in the course of performing work. Cashing a paycheck during a lunch break isn’t a job-related comfort activity, so that doctrine doesn’t support compensation here. Likewise, the going-and-coming rule addresses injuries on the way to and from work; a private errand during a break does not fall under that rule in a way that would make the injury compensable.