Many employers are employing hybrid work arrangements post-COVID-19. In an employment case of first impression, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled that an employer cannot be held responsible for injuries caused by their employee during work hours simply because the employee was on a hybrid work schedule which permitted them to work both in office and at home.
In Chang v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group, 2026 S.O.S. 1145, employee Brittany Doremus worked for Southern California Permanente Medical Group both in office and at home on a hybrid schedule. In September of 2022, Doremus struck bicyclist Kai-Lin Chang with her car, causing Chang injuries. At the time of the accident, Doremus was technically on-call for Permanente, but was working from home and was dropping off her children’s Halloween costumes at the dry cleaners.
Chang sued Doremus and her employer, claiming that Doremus was “working” for Permanente at the time of the accident due to her hybrid schedule. The bicyclist argued that California’s so called “going and coming rule”–which holds that employers cannot be held responsible for accidents that occur when an employer is going to and coming from work–should not apply because due to the hybrid nature of Doremus’ employment, she was technically on-call to her employer the entire day and was therefore at work at the time of the accident.
The Appeals Court rejected Chang’s argument finding that a hybrid worker who works both in-office and at home does not expand the basis of injury liability simply due to the hybrid nature of the work. The Court determined that a hybrid worker who works both in-office and at home is no more acting within the scope of employment when driving to and from work on in-office days than is a non-hybrid worker who drives to and from work every day.
Thus, the Appeals Court was unwilling to create an exception to the going and coming rule for a hybrid work arrangement.
This is a significant win for employers who utilize hybrid work schedules for their employees. Employers will generally not be held liable for injuries caused by their employees simply because they elect to utilize a hybrid employment model.