Feng Mofeng is an employee of a catering company in Haikou and works as a waiter.
On July 18, 2014, Haikou encountered the super typhoon of level 16 " Rammasun".
At around 18:00 that night, Feng Mofeng was walking from home to a restaurant for the evening shift. While passing through Jiefang West Road, he was hit in the head by a branch blown off by the typhoon. He was sent to the hospital for emergency treatment, but died after the rescue failed.
On November 17, 2014, Feng Mofeng’s mother, Chen Yujuan, applied to the Haikou Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau to identify Feng Mofeng as a work-related injury. Since the materials he provided could not prove the existence of a labor relationship between Feng Mofeng and the company, the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau issued a notice to supplement the materials. After the company submitted the labor contract signed with Feng Mofeng, on January 20, 2015, the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau officially accepted the application for work-related injury determination. .
On March 16, 2015, the Bureau of Human Resources and Social Security issued a work-related injury determination decision, stating that Feng Mofeng was injured and died by a tree branch blown by a typhoon on his way to work, which did not comply with the provisions of Articles 14 and 15 of the " Work Injury Insurance Regulations " Under such circumstances, it is decided not to be recognized as a work-related injury or treated as a work-related injury.
Chen Yujuan was dissatisfied and applied to the Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security for reconsideration. After the Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security accepts the application, it will issue an "Administrative Reconsideration Reply Notice" to the Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau in accordance with the reconsideration procedures, and notify the company to participate in the administrative review.
After review, the Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security made the No. 2 review decision on June 9, 2015, deciding to uphold the No. 161 decision issued by the Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau.
Chen Yujuan was dissatisfied and filed an administrative lawsuit with the court.
Reasons for prosecution
1. The personal injuries suffered by Feng Mofeng meet the conditions for work-related injuries due to working time, workplace, and for work purposes. Feng Mofeng works in a restaurant. Because his home is relatively close to his workplace, he usually walks to and from his home and work. Feng Mofeng’s injury occurred on the road between his place of residence and his workplace. The injury Feng Mofeng sustained on his way to work was a personal injury accident that occurred during the necessary hours of work.
2. Articles 14 and 15 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" stipulate examples of situations that should be recognized as work-related injuries, but cannot exhaust all situations that should be recognized as work-related injuries. This provision is only an example, so it is impossible to exhaust all situations that should be recognized as work-related injuries. All situations. Situations not listed are consistent with the legislative spirit of the "Work-related Injury Insurance Regulations" and should also be recognized as work-related injuries. Article 1 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" clearly stipulates: These regulations are formulated in order to ensure that employees who are injured in accidents or suffer from occupational diseases at work receive medical treatment and economic compensation, promote work-related injury prevention and vocational rehabilitation, and disperse the employer's work-related injury risks. Feng Mofeng was injured in an accident at work and should be protected by the Work Injury Insurance Regulations.
3. There is no essential difference between injuries suffered due to accidents and injuries suffered due to traffic accidents, etc. to the injured employees and their families. It is also an accident on the way to work. If a traffic accident is recognized as a work-related injury and other accidents are not recognized, it also violates the principle of fairness and justice in the law.
Opinions of the Bureau of Human Resources and Social Security
Articles 14 and 15 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" clearly stipulate the recognition of work-related injuries and the statutory circumstances deemed as work-related injuries. In this case, the injured employee Feng Mofeng was broken by a typhoon on his way to work. The death caused by being hit by a tree branch does not fall under any of the circumstances stipulated in Articles 14 and 15 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" that should be recognized or regarded as a work-related injury.
Company opinion
First of all, we are very sad about Feng Mofeng's unfortunate experience. The company has immediately sent a condolence payment of 57,900.00 yuan to his family. This is the humanistic care and humanitarian help of the company and all its employees. Decision No. 161 issued by the Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau on March 16, 2015 and reconsideration decision No. 2 made by the Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security have clear facts, sufficient evidence, correct application of the law, and legal procedures, and should be upheld in accordance with the law.
1. Facts. On July 18, 2014, Haikou was hit by super typhoon Rammasun, a Category 16 category. The company posted the "Typhoon Prevention Notice from the Overseas Chinese Building Property Management Office" on the restaurant's cultural wall on July 15, and all employees were familiar with it. On July 18, Feng Mofeng went home after finishing his morning work. The evening shift worked from 18:30 to 20:30.Due to the weather, the foreman of the company told colleagues (including Feng Mofeng) who worked the evening shift not to go home at noon (stay in the restaurant to avoid the typhoon). Those who insisted on going home must call the restaurant before going to work in the afternoon to confirm whether they would go to work. . Because Feng Mofeng was forced to go out when Typhoon Rammason was at its most violent (around 18:00), he died after being hit by a tree trunk broken by the super typhoon.
2. Applicable law. Articles 14 and 15 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" are the legal conditions for determining work-related injuries. However, Feng Mofeng forced himself to go out when Typhoon Rammason was at its most violent (around 18:00), resulting in his death after being hit by a tree trunk broken by the super typhoon. This was different from the work-related injuries recognized in the Work Injury Insurance Regulations.
3. Article 14 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance" clearly stipulates: "Anyone who is injured by a traffic accident or an urban rail transit, passenger ferry or train accident on the way to and from get off work that is not the main responsibility of the individual shall be deemed to have a work-related injury."
Feng Mofeng forced himself to go out when Typhoon Rammasun was at its most violent (at around 18:00). Feng Mofeng knew that going out would involve huge safety risks. He was responsible for it and should bear the consequences.
Court decision
This court believes that the focus of the dispute between the parties in this case is whether the injury suffered by Feng Mofeng constitutes a work-related injury, and whether the Decision No. 161 procedure issued by the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau is illegal.
According to the provisions of Article 14 of the "Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance", if an employee has one of the following circumstances, he shall be deemed to be a work-related injury: (1) Injured by an accident due to work reasons during working hours and in the workplace; (2) During working hours; Those who were injured by accidents before and after they were engaged in work-related preparatory or finishing work in the workplace; (3) During working hours and in the workplace, due to the performance of work Those who are injured by violence or other accidents during their duties; (4) Those who suffer from occupational diseases; (5) Those who are injured due to work reasons or the whereabouts of accidents are unknown while away from work; (6) On the way to and from get off work, those who are not primarily responsible for their injuries Injuries caused by traffic accidents or urban rail transit, passenger ferry, or train accidents; (7) Other situations that should be recognized as work-related injuries according to laws and administrative regulations.
According to the provisions of Article 15, if an employee has any of the following circumstances, it will be deemed as a work-related injury:
(1) Death of a sudden illness during working hours and at the workplace or death after rescue efforts failed within 48 hours; (2) Injury during rescue and disaster relief and other activities to safeguard national interests and public interests; (3) Where the employee was originally Those who have served in the military and have become disabled due to injuries in war or on the line of duty, have obtained a Revolutionary Disabled Soldier Certificate, and the old injury relapses after arriving at the employer.
As an employee of a restaurant, Feng Mofeng was injured and died by a tree branch blown by a typhoon on his way to work. His situation did not meet the above conditions for work-related injuries or deemed work-related injuries. Based on this, the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau made a decision not to recognize the work-related injury to the plaintiff, which complied with the above provisions. The plaintiff's reason for suing has no legal basis and this court will not support it. After accepting the plaintiff's reconsideration application, the Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security will review the case in accordance with the reconsideration procedures and make a reconsideration decision within the statutory time limit. The procedures are legal.
In summary, the plaintiff’s reason for suing has no factual and legal basis. This court will not support it and should be dismissed according to law. According to the provisions of Article 69 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:
rejects the plaintiff's claim.
Case number: (2015) Xiuxingchuzi No. 36 (the parties’ names are pseudonyms)
Source: Labor Law Library, Heze Intermediate People’s Court
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-