In a recent matter involving a young man who was engaged for a ‘trial period’ of five days and who suffered a serious back injury during such period it was determined that he was a “worker” within the primary definition of that term under the Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981.

It was further held that the young man was engaged pursuant to a contract of service when he was injured and that he was not, as contended by the employer, only participating in a gratuitous work trial.

The arrangement between the parties was considered to be a partly express and partly implied contract of casual, manual employment during which the employee was to receive some brief and basic training and orientation and was to be appraised by the employer.

This was considered to be not an uncommon feature of the casual employment market for low paid and unskilled manual workers which led to the conclusion by the judicial officer that the injured young man was employed under a contract of service.

Accordingly it was ordered that the injured worker be paid by the employer due weekly payments of compensation as for total incapacity on the basis of full time employment together with payment of statutory expenses.

Related Havilah Legal service(s): Personal Injury