I would have thought that the emplyees would be given separate rooms and beds, if thats the case then someone is in the wrong room or bed. Maybe the hotel only had one room for all, anyway the fixture that broke certainly threw some fresh light on what was supposed to be activity that would have otherwise been kept in the dark. Compensation?.................Please, do me a favour, if the sex was that bad sue the guy.

If she or her lawyer had any brains, they should have kept quiet about the sex and just claimed against the hotel for the light falling her whilst she lay in the bed.

David

Only a 'Public Servant' could make such a brazen claim ... This wouldn't have happened 20 years ago when the concept that blame for consequences of an individuals actions must be attributed anywhere bar their own feet was relatively new and fuzzy.

Apart from the obvious fact that her sexual activity had no connection with work, I wonder about the accommodation itself.

Surely the Employer would have arranged and paid for SINGLE accommodation? What were the terms and conditions of that accommodation? Was the 'extra guest' allowable under the terms? Was there a fault with the light fitting that caused it to become dislodged easily? Otherwise was it the 'unruly' behaviour of Ms Shagalot and/or her fck buddy which caused damage to the property which in turn resulted in injury? In the first instance the Motel may have a case to answer, not the Employer. In the second the Motel may be within its rights to seek recompense for property damage.

Another question - if Ms Shagalot was getting it on against a tree in the Motel gardens and a spider bit her bum, would her Employer be liable for costs of treatment and psychological damage due to resulting arachnophobia?

Honestly - if Shagalot wins her case then all I can say is common sense and fairness have completely disappeared from the Industrial judicial system and God help we mugs who pay taxes for the likes of this 'lady' to rip off the system.

Please - dismiss her claim and give her the opportunity to find work in the private sector!

VK3AUU

My thought exactly. If the light fitting had fallen on her while she slept, then it is a clear case of compensation. One can only assume that the sex was so vigorous... I mean were they swinging off the chandeliers? In which case they could be said to have contributed to the injury.

Personally, I believe that many people are simply outraged that a woman was completely upfront and honest about the background her injury (a little too honest methinks) and if the sex did not contribute to the fallen light fitting, then she is just as entitled to compensation as if the accident had occurred while sleeping.

What I dont understand is why the claim against the employer?

I can see a valid claim against the motel/hotel if she was injured because of a faulty light fitting.

But to claim on workers comp seems a bit rich.

Maybe the fitting wasn't at fault Banjo? I think worker's comp is payable when you are injured for whatever reason.

"Personally, I believe that many people are simply outraged that a woman was completely upfront and honest about the background her injury (a little too honest methinks) and if the sex did not contribute to the fallen light fitting, then she is just as entitled to compensation as if the accident had occurred while sleeping."

Really Ammonite? What role does gender have to play in this fiasco? The issue is about where the so-called responsibility of the Employer to health and safety stops?

I agree that if the light fitting was faulty then compensation is due. If on the other hand (which seems more likely, since there would have been little explanation due otherwise) the injury was caused as a result of unreasonable outside of work activity then responsibility rests with her and/or her companion.

This is akin to the burglar who sues the owner of the premises he was in process of robbing for an injury caused by tripping over a childs toy. Sorry but I'm over the spurious claims. It's about time there was a crackdown and it needs to go further than knocking back Ms Shagalot's grasping ambitions.

'In general if an employer sends a staff member out of town for work then the employer's responsibility does not just end at the end of the business day. The employer has a responsibility to ensure the employee is accommodated somewhere safe.

However I think it's unfair to say the employer should somehow be responsible for injuries a staff member sustains outside defined working hours or away from any work- organised event.'

I disagree with the last part above. If the employer insists that an employee be away from where they'd normally be in order to attend a work function - then employer is responsbile for their safety at all times. If the employer does not want to cover this, then they should not require employees to attend such functions etc.

I would have to say that I am not necessarily supportive of this particualr claim, however if the employer had not required her to attend the function, then she may well not have met her acquaintance and not suffered her injury - you could certainly make a case for her.

What if 'Ms Shagalot' contracted a sexually transmitted disease as a result of her extra-curricular activities? How about if she did her fck buddy an injury? God forbid the scenario but what if her tryst resulted in pregnancy?

Is her Employer somehow RESPONSIBLE?

As an employer myself, and one who values and goes the extra mile to reward and keep GOOD productive employees happy in their jobs (useless ones can rejoin the jobseeker queue as soon as I can offload them) I expect Staff members sent on out of town assignment to exercise same care and personal responsibility that he/she would 'at home'. They are instructed to behave in a way that reflects well on the Company during work hours or at work related functions. That includes warning about immoderate alcohol or illicit substance use. Individual accommodation arrangements are made in reputable establishments and meal allowances provided.

Should my employee choose to engage in recreational activities after work hours that is their perogative. Just as I am not responsible for what they do once they arrive home after work here, I don't consider any difference because they are away. Should they go out drinking, fall down and hurt themselves - that is their responsibility. Get into a fight and get injured - ditto or their assailant. Should they find someone who agrees to engage in sexual activity, the most PERSONAL and non-work related activity I can think of unless your business is prostitution, then any repercussion of that is their problem.

If they suffer any injury during travel to or from work, during working hours including work related functions then I have a responsibility. Otherwise NO. It is about time this CRAP was cleared up