A court has affirmed that the so-called "going and coming" rule protects employers with hybrid workforces, holding that an employee's commute to a workplace remains excluded from workers' compensation coverage even when the employee works remotely part of the time.

The ruling touches a people-process decision that hybrid employers face with growing frequency: whether injuries sustained during an employee's trip to or from the office fall within the scope of workers' compensation. Under the going and coming doctrine, an employee traveling to and from work is generally outside the course and scope of employment, which bars workers' comp claims for commute injuries. The court's decision confirms that this protection applies to hybrid arrangements — a significant data point for employers calibrating their injury-reporting, claims-handling and return-to-office policies.

What the decision means for hybrid employers

The going and coming rule has long served as a liability shield in traditional office settings. Its application to hybrid work had been less certain, because hybrid employees split their time between home and employer premises, blurring the line between a personal commute and a work-related trip.

The court's affirmation removes some of that ambiguity. For hybrid employers, the decision supports the position that days when an employee commutes to the office follow the same compensation framework as fully on-site roles: the commute itself is not compensable.

That framing carries practical consequences across several HR processes:

• Workers' compensation claims administration. Claims teams can apply the going and coming exclusion to hybrid employees' commute injuries with stronger legal footing, though each claim still turns on its specific facts.

• Policy documentation. Employers should ensure handbooks and remote-work agreements clearly state where employees are expected to work and on which days, because a documented hybrid schedule strengthens the argument that a trip to the office is an ordinary commute.

• **Special-errand exceptions.`` HR and risk managers should remember that the rule is not absolute. Exceptions — such as trips undertaken at the employer's request, errands that benefit the employer, or travel during work hours for work purposes — can still bring a commute inside coverage.

Why the ruling arrives at a consequential moment

Hybrid schedules have become a fixture of post-pandemic work arrangements, and commute-injury questions follow directly from them. When an employee works three days at home and two in the office, every trip to the workplace is technically a commute — but employers have had limited case law confirming that courts will treat hybrid commutes the same way they treat traditional ones.

This decision supplies that confirmation. It signals to employers that maintaining a hybrid model does not, by itself, expand workers' compensation exposure for commuting injuries.

At the same time, the ruling underscores the value of precision in remote-work documentation. Employers that leave hybrid schedules informal — without designated in-office days, written expectations or clear reporting lines — may find it harder to invoke the going and coming rule when a disputed claim arises.

Practical steps for people leaders

HR teams can act on the decision in several concrete ways:

1. Audit remote-work agreements. Confirm that hybrid arrangements specify which days employees report to the workplace and which location serves as the employee's principal place of work.

2. Align claims handling with the rule. Train claims administrators and managers on the going and coming doctrine and its exceptions, so commute-injury reports are triaged consistently.

3. Brief managers on the exceptions. If an employee is injured while running an errand assigned by the employer or traveling between work locations mid-day, the injury may fall outside the exclusion — and mishandled reporting can compound liability.

4. Coordinate with workers' comp carriers. Share the ruling with carriers and brokers to ensure coverage positions for hybrid employees match the court's reasoning.

The bottom line for compensation strategy

The decision does not change statutory obligations, but it clarifies how a long-standing doctrine maps onto contemporary work arrangements. For HR leaders weighing the risk profile of hybrid policies, the ruling offers reassurance on one specific exposure: ordinary commutes by hybrid employees remain outside workers' compensation under the going and coming rule, as they have long been for on-site staff.

As hybrid and remote arrangements continue to evolve, employers should expect further judicial clarification at the margins — particularly around special errands, travel between home and multiple work sites, and injuries during employer-directed travel — and should document hybrid schedules accordingly in anticipation of future disputes.