Recently, in Kim Goulding v. NJ Friendship House, Inc., 245 N.J. 157 (2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey considered whether an employee injured while volunteering at a “social or recreational event” can receive workers’ compensation benefits.
In September of 2017, Kim Goulding, an employee of North Jersey Friendship House, Inc. (“Friendship House”), volunteered for a “Family Fun Day.” Goulding assisted by setting up breakfast and preparing lunch for the attendees. As she prepared lunch, she stepped into a pothole and injured her ankle. Goulding filed a workers’ compensation claim which was denied by Friendship House. Friendship House stated Goulding was not entitled to relief because she was not working at the time. The Appellate Court sustained the decision, and the Supreme Court of New Jersey took the matter under review.
Generally, under the Workers’ Compensation Act, an employee injured during a social or recreational activity cannot receive workers’ compensation benefits for injuries sustained during such activity. This general rule, however, has expressly permitted an exception under N.J.S.A. 34:15-7 such that, “when such recreational or social activities [1] are regular incident of employment and [2] produce a benefit to the employer beyond improvement in employee health and morale” the injury is compensable. Ultimately, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and held Goulding was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. The Supreme Court first addressed whether application of the exception was appropriate within the meaning of the statute. Specifically, it analyzed whether Goulding’s activities at the event were “social or recreational.” The Court found the lower courts erred by looking at the event as a whole and that “[i]f the employee is helping to facilitate the activity in the manner that occurred here, the event cannot be deemed a social or recreational activity as to that employee, and any injuries sustained by the employee while acting in that capacity should be compensated.” New Jersey has long held that when an employee is mandated to perform tasks outside of the workplace and then injured, the injury is compensable. However, “determination of whether a noncompulsory activity is a recreational or social activity within the meaning of the statute thus remains a fact intensive and case-specific inquiry.” In this case, despite the fact that Goulding volunteered, her activities at the event were not recreational or social and to disqualify her compensability because volunteered “ignores that the Act is supposed to be construed liberally in favor of compensation, and it fails to consider the employee's role in the activity.” Alternatively, even if such activity was “social or recreational,” the Court found that Goulding’s role at the event satisfied both prongs under N.J.S.A. 34:15-7. As to the first prong, the Court held that she would not have attended the event and would not have been injured but for the Friendship Houses request for volunteers. Friendship House maintained complete control over the event and was actively involved, therefore, the volunteer activity was a regular incident of employment. The Court also found Goulding satisfied the second prong as there was to be no evidence Goulding benefited as to “health and morale.” In fact, the Court found Friendship House was the beneficiary, “Friendship House received the ‘intangible benefits’ of promoting itself and fostering goodwill in the community.”
From a defense perspective, as an employee’s sole remedy for injuries sustained during the course of their employment is workers’ compensation, the Act is liberally construed, and employers may be responsible for injuries sustained when an employee volunteers at an event outside of their normal course.