A weak economy In Connecticut as in Many other places has generated an increasing number of temporary work positions as companies are reluctant to hire permanent full time workers. This is not just a payroll issue but also one of oversight and management. In factories, warehouses and construction sites where many of these temps wind up laboring there is often a lack of training, supervision and accountability for the safety of those so employed. When a temporary worker is injured there is of course a workers compensation remedy available but the company for whom they were toiling is simply free to hire another temp and ask that the injured temp not return at all. To balance those inequitable scales and also to make up for the harm caused by shoddy or sometimes non existent safety practices the injured temporary employee should consider the initiation of a traditional tort action sounding in negligence which may in such circumstances be asserted against the company on whose job site they were injured. This remedy is one that would not generally be available to a direct employee due to the existence of a workers compensation exclusivity bar to bringing such actions which is legislated into the law in our State as well as many other Sister States.
Even when this tactical remedy is employed, the Defendant employer of such Temps sometimes asserts entitlement to immunity and there have been some poor judicial decisions sustaining that position where the legal issue has not been properly briefed. It would seem to be the case by a clear reading of Connecticut General Statutes, Section 31-291 as well as Connecticut Supreme Court authority on the issue that this should not be allowed. Subsequent to the amendment to Connecticut General Statutes, Section 31-291, which took place in 1988, the provisions of the Workers' Compensation exclusivity bar were specifically not be extended to any such employer relative to a civil action brought by an injured employee or his dependents unless such principal employer had actually paid Workers' Compensation benefits to such an injured employee or his dependents. In Pelletier v Sordoni 264 Conn 509 (03). The Connecticut Supreme Court has explicitly recognized that this was the clear legislative intent of this unambiguous statutory section as well. Pelletier @ 525. In addition to that, leased employees are dealt with under Connecticut General Statute Section 21-292 which makes clear that it is the leasing or temporary employment agency which remains responsible for the payment of applicable workers compensation benefits due to any such injured employee. The net result of which is that as long as these temp agencies which populate the major metro areas such as Hartford, New Haven, New London, Middlesex and Fairfield Counties maintain appropriate work injury coverages the tort remedy should remain available to workers injured by the negligence and carelessness of those who directly benefit from their services.
