Request a free Case Evaluation

Are You Covered for a Commuting Injury on a Hybrid Work Schedule in Minnesota? Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Law Explained 

If you’re injured while commuting under a hybrid or return-to-office schedule, are you covered by Minnesota workers’ compensation? 

The short answer: maybe. 

A recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision on one of my cases highlights how complicated these cases can be, especially as more employees split time between home and the office. 

 Minnesota Supreme Court Case: Ludwig v. Dakota County 

In a recent decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in Ludwig v. Dakota County that an employee injured while preparing to return work equipment to the office was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. 

My client was injured while loading work equipment into her vehicle before her shift, as instructed by her employer. While this may seem like a straightforward work injury, the legal analysis is far from simple. At the trial level the Compensation Judge determined she was not entitled to benefits. The Minnesota Worker’s Compensation Court of Appeals and Minnesota Supreme Court disagreed and awarded my client benefits.  

This case also gained attention in the Star Tribune, which covered how return-to-office policies are affecting workers’ compensation claims. Coverage like this can influence how courts and insurers view hybrid work injuries. 

The “Coming and Going Rule” in Minnesota Workers’ Compensation 

Minnesota follows what’s called the coming and going rule. The “coming and going rule” generally states: 

Injuries that occur while commuting to or from work are not covered. 

At first glance, this seems like a clear rule. However, modern work arrangements, especially hybrid schedules and traveling employees, have made these cases much more complex. 

When Is a Hybrid Commuting Injury Covered? 

To overcome the coming-and-going default rule there needs to be an exception. Over decades of case law several doctrines have been developed as potential exceptions including but not limited to:

Special Errand Exception

This was the key issue in Ludwig. A “special errand” may exist when: 

  • The employer requests a task outside normal work hours  
  • The travel is integral to the task  
  • The task is not routine  

Courts do not always require all three factors, making this a highly fact-specific analysis.

Ingress/Egress Doctrine

Employers must provide safe access to and from the workplace. This may include: 

  • Parking lots  
  • Sidewalks or entryways  
  • Designated paths into the workplace 

Injuries that occur in these areas may be covered under workers’ compensation. 

Special Hazard Rule

An injury may be covered if the employee is exposed to a unique or increased risk tied to their employment.

Dual Purpose Doctrine

If a trip serves both personal and work-related purposes, an injury during that trip may still be compensable.

Traveling Employee Rule

Employees who travel for work may be covered from the time they leave home until they return, depending on: 

  • Whether the activity was reasonable  
  • Whether they deviated from work-related travel  

Why Hybrid Work Makes Workers’ Compensation More Complicated

Hybrid and remote work blur the line between personal time and work time. 

Even the Minnesota Supreme Court has acknowledged this difficulty. In Ludwig, Justice McKeig noted that the distinction between commuting and work-related activity is becoming: “blurred beyond recognition.” 

This uncertainty means that small details can determine whether your claim is approved or denied. 

What to Do If Your Workers’ Compensation Claim Is Denied

If your claim was denied after a commuting or hybrid work injury, you are not alone. These cases often involve: 

  • Complex legal doctrines  
  • Disputed facts  
  • Insurance company resistance  

An experienced Minnesota workers’ compensation attorney can help evaluate whether an exception applies to your case. 

Need Help With a Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Claim?

If you were injured while commuting, traveling for work, or working under a hybrid schedule, you may still be entitled to benefits. 

If your claim has been denied in the Twin Cities or anywhere in Minnesota, it’s important to get legal guidance. Meuser, Yackley, & Rowland offers free consultations and attorneys’ fees are only owed if we recover a benefit on your behalf. 

Contact our office today at (952) 345-2052 or email eschwab@meuserlaw.com to discuss your case and protect your rights. 

Posted By

Eric Schwab

Related Posts

Eric Schwab
See More

CONTACT US NOW

FOR A FREE CONSULTATION