Going to work via a detour to visit his mother shows filial piety, and a traffic accident on the way constitutes a work-related injury.

Compiled from: Fuzhou Court Network, Legal Affairs Home, Shandong High Court
 
Case review
Zhang was an employee of a light vehicle company, with a work start time of 8:30. Every morning at 7:30, on his way to work, Zhang would make a detour to visit and take care of his 88-year-old mother, Yu, before continuing on to work.

 

One day, as usual, Zhang was driving his two-wheeled electric vehicle from home, having bought breakfast to visit his mother, when another electric vehicle came from the side and collided with him, causing Zhang to be injured. The traffic police determined that Zhang bore equal responsibility for the accident. Subsequently, Zhang applied to the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau for work injury determination, which issued a decision not to recognize it as a work-related injury. Dissatisfied, Zhang filed an administrative lawsuit with the court, requesting the revocation of the Bureau's decision.
 
 
[1] Relevant laws and regulations
Article 6 of the Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Cases on Work-Related Injury Insurance 
Where the social insurance administrative department determines the following circumstances as “on the way to or from work,” the people's court shall support such determination:
(2) Commuting between the workplace and the residence of the spouse, parents, or children within a reasonable time and along a reasonable route;
 
Regulations on Work-Related Injury Insurance Article 14
An employee shall be deemed to have suffered a work-related injury under any of the following circumstances:
(6) Being injured in a motor vehicle accident during the commute to or from work;
 
 
[1] Court Opinion
The court held that although Zhang took a detour on his way to work, it was to care for his elderly mother, and since he regularly took this route, it became a reasonable route for his commute. Zhang’s situation meets the condition under Article 14(6) of the Regulations on Work-Related Injury Insurance, which states that an employee injured in a traffic accident on the way to or from work, where the employee is not primarily at fault, should be recognized as having a work-related injury. The decision by the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau to deny work-related injury recognition should be revoked.

 

 
[1] The author's perspective
As can be seen from this case, a "reasonable commuting route" does not refer to only one fixed mandatory route, nor is it limited to the shortest route or the route designated by the employer. As long as an employee travels between their residence and workplace along a reasonable route within a reasonable time for the purpose of commuting, it should fall within the scope of "on the way to or from work."
 
On the other hand, supporting one’s elderly parents is both a duty of every child and a traditional virtue in our country. In this case, Zhang and his mother Yu lived in different places. To care for his elderly mother, Zhang had long been delivering daily necessities to her on his way to work, then proceeding from her home to his workplace. Therefore, this behavior falls within the scope of activities necessary for his daily life. Consequently, it cannot be categorized as an unreasonable detour, nor can it negate the nature of his commute. Thus, the route Zhang took to his mother’s home and then to work is a reasonable route.
 
The "commuting to and from work" time refers to the reasonable time period for traveling from the place of residence to the workplace or from the workplace to the place of residence after determining a reasonable route. Whether the commuting time is reasonable cannot be simply understood as the clock-in and clock-out times stipulated by the employer's attendance rules. Circumstances such as overtime work and delays or early departures arising from reasonable causes should also be taken into consideration in determining "reasonable time." In this case, Zhang drove a two-wheeled electric vehicle from his place of residence to his mother's home and then to his workplace, which took approximately 40 minutes in total. A certain light automobile company stipulated that the morning work start time was 8:30 a.m. Zhang departed from his place of residence nearly one hour early in order to visit and care for his mother, Ms. Yu, on his way to work. This was based on work-related considerations, and his early departure for work was not inconsistent with general social life experience. Therefore, the plaintiff's departure for work at 7:30 a.m. falls within the reasonable time for commuting to work.