PPL v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
2014 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 316
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2014Background
- Claimant, a long‑time PPL employee, parked in the Linden Street Parking Deck (Linden Deck), a multi‑level garage owned/operated by a third party and used primarily by PPL employees; PPL subsidized employee parking there.
- A skywalk owned by PPL connects the North Building to the Linden Deck; access to the deck and skywalk requires swipe/ID cards.
- Claimant fell in the Linden Deck after her shift ended and sustained serious arm/shoulder and head injuries, leading to surgery and ongoing disability.
- WCJ granted Claimant’s workers’ compensation claim, finding the Linden Deck an integral part of PPL’s premises and that the injury occurred in the course and scope of employment; the Board affirmed.
- On appeal to this Court, PPL argued the Linden Deck was not part of its premises (parking was optional, third‑party owned/maintained, and PPL did not require parking there) and that Claimant’s fall was not caused by a condition of PPL’s premises. The Court reversed the Board and WCJ.
Issues
| Issue | Kloss's Argument | PPL's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Claimant was injured in the course of employment because the Linden Deck was part of employer’s premises | Linden Deck was effectively employer’s premises: subsidized, restricted, physically connected by skywalk, and primarily used by employees | Parking was optional, deck owned/maintained by a third party, PPL did not control the deck; subsidy is merely a benefit | Court held deck was not part of employer’s premises; parking subsidy alone insufficient to make it integral |
| Whether employer’s subsidized parking makes the lot an "integral" part of business | Subsidy and employee dependence show integral use | Subsidy is like other benefits and does not transform third‑party property into employer premises | Court held subsidy immaterial under precedent (Ortt) and characterized it as a benefit, not control |
| Whether injury resulted from a condition of the premises (required for on‑premises rule) | The floor/ground struck in fall is a condition of the premises regardless of why she fell | Claimant admitted she tripped over her own feet; no defective condition linked to PPL’s premises | Court agreed a condition contributing to injury must exist and found Claimant’s fall did not establish the Linden Deck was employer’s premises, so requirement unmet |
| Significance of PPL owning the skywalk connecting building to deck | Skywalk connection and card access made deck functionally part of premises | Skywalk is a convenience; ownership of skywalk does not override third‑party ownership/control of deck | Court held skywalk not dispositive; connectivity does not convert third‑party deck into employer premises |
Key Cases Cited
- Markle v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Bucknell University), 785 A.2d 151 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (premises/integral‑part analysis)
- Ortt v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (PPL Services Corp.), 874 A.2d 1264 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (employer subsidy/optional parking is a benefit, not premises)
- Waronsky v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Mellon Bank), 958 A.2d 1118 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (optional parking and lack of employer control negate premise status)
- Newhouse v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Harris Cleaning Service, Inc.), 530 A.2d 545 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (on‑premises injury when private access was the only means of egress)
- Epler v. North American Rockwell Corp., 393 A.2d 1163 (Pa. 1978) (ownership not dispositive; parking may be integral when employer requires use)
- Thomas Jefferson Univ. Hosp. v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (Cattalo), 601 A.2d 476 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (injury from striking workplace surface is injury from condition of premises)
- Good Shepherd Workshop v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Caffrey), 555 A.2d 1374 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (workplace floor is a condition of premises)