Christmas is only three days away. So, I decided to provide a review of three somewhat amusing cases in Alabama involving the interplay of the holidays and the workplace.
Don’t Give Employees Heavy Christmas Hams
Many employers give Christmas hams to employees. Be warned: if the ham is too heavy you might wind up paying workers’ compensation. See Moesch v. Baldwin County Elec. Memb. Corp., 479 So.2d 1271 (Ala. Civ. App. 1985). In Moesch, the employee injured her back at the end of the work day, when she picked up a 20-pound Christmas ham given by her employer. The Court found that giving Christmas hams “would tend to boost the morale of employees, which would be beneficial to defendant.” Moesch, 479 So.2d at 1273. As a result, the court found that the employee’s injury “arose out of and in the course of” her employment, entitling her to workers’ compensation benefits.
It’s OK to Allow Dancing at Christmas Parties
While ham-based injuries appear to be compensable, dance injuries are not. See Anderson v. Custom Caterers, Inc., 185 So.2d 383 (Ala. 1966). In Anderson, an employee was injured as a result of a fall she sustained while dancing at a Christmas party. The party was held at the employer’s place of business and alcohol was served. The employee argued, like the employee in Moesch, that the employer received a benefit from the morale boost to employees. Nevertheless, the Court found that the injury did not arise out of or in the course of employment, and the employee was not entitled to workers compensation.
Holiday Pay Can Save You From an Unemployment Claim
In Etowah County, a steel foundry closed for two weeks over the holidays. A collective bargaining agreement provided that employees received “holiday pay” and were paid a full day’s wage for Christmas Day and New Years day, even though the foundry was closed. Despite that generosity, employees claimed that they were unemployed during the two-week closure and sought unemployment benefits. See Autwell v. State Dept. of Indus. Rel., 249 So.2d 625 (Ala. Civ. App.) Nevertheless, they could only be considered unemployed if they did not receive “wages” as defined by the unemployment compensation statute. The Autwell court found that the holiday pay was sufficient “wages” and affirmed denial of the claim for benefits.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!