A recent court ruling has clarified that employees are not restricted to the shortest path when commuting to and from work. Alternative routes may also be covered under work injury protection if considered reasonable.

The case involved an employee who died in a traffic accident while cycling to work. The incident occurred near the workplace, but not along what the employer considered the most direct or suitable route. The company argued that the employee had chosen a longer, steeper road with heavier traffic, one not commonly used for commuting, and therefore the route should not qualify for work-related injury protection.

Authorities disagreed. They determined that the employee was engaged in a legitimate commute at the time of the accident and classified the incident as a work-related injury. The ruling was later upheld in court.

The judgment emphasized that a reasonable commute is not limited to the shortest or most convenient path. In practice, employees may choose different routes for a variety of reasons, including traffic patterns, road conditions, weather, or personal preference. As long as the individual is traveling between their home and place of work within a reasonable time frame and for the clear purpose of commuting, the chosen route may be recognized as valid.

In this case, although the road where the accident occurred was not the most direct, it still led to the workplace entrance and fell within the scope of a normal commute. As a result, the employee's death was rightly recognized as work-related.

The ruling underscores a more flexible interpretation of commuting and affirms that work injury protections should reflect the practical realities of daily travel rather than just lines on a map.

Source: Official WeChat account of China Labour and Social Security News