Two American healthcare workers who were exposed to Ebola at their place of employment have tested positive for the virus. The question is, will they receive workers' compensation for contracting the virus?
For Ebola to be compensable under workers' compensation, it would need to pass two tests, according to an Insurance Journal report. First, it must be considered "occupational" in that exposure to the virus resulted as a function of the scope of employment. Since the hospital employees were at their place of work, benefiting the employer when they were exposed to Ebola, the first test is satisfied.
The second test is not so easily cleared. To be compensable, Ebola must be considered "peculiar" to the scope of the employee's work. For non-healthcare workers, Ebola is really no more peculiar in nature to the job than being exposed to any other virus or flu and would be unlikely to qualify, according to the report.
The two nurses who cared for Thomas Eric Duncan, the Ebola patient at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, however, would presumably be able to prove an increased risk of contracting the virus is "peculiar" to doing their job and treating the patient properly. Since the nurses risked exposing themselves to the bacteria as part of their job, Ebola could be considered compensable under workers' compensation.
Correction: The following was updated on Oct. 28: The initial report mischaracterized the source as saying the nurses would be unlikely to receive workers' compensation protection. We apologize for the error.
More articles on Ebola:
Physicians already disapprove of Obama's new 'Ebola czar'
Nebraska Medical Center to release patient treated for Ebola
Flu? Ebola? Sorting out viral cases during Ebola scare could strain ED capacity