The fact that a job has a discrete and limited duration does not make the employee who holds it a traveling employee.

The Commonwealth Court affirmed the decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board. The court concluded that the “fixed place of work” exception to the “coming and going” rule did not apply. The court noted that the claimant said that he moved equipment to this particular job site when the job began, anticipated working only at that job site on the date of the accident, and worked exclusively at that job site for several weeks before the accident. According to the court, the fact that a job has a discrete and limited duration does not make the employee who holds it a traveling employee. The court also held that travel was not included in the claimant’s employment contract with the employer.

_{Case Law Alerts, 3^rd Quarter, July 2018}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2018 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}