‘Mind-bogglingly stupid’ worker awarded comp for injury
June 16, 2010 by Christian SchappelPosted in: Employment law, Money, Pay and benefits, Special Report - Benefits
A man who fed grizzly bears for a living decided to smoke pot before work. Can you guess what happened next?
Surprise. Surprise. He was seriously injured when one of the bears at Great Bear Adventures in West Glacier, MT, attacked him.
Lucky for him the man was able to escape with his life after crawling under an electric fence.
He admitted to his employer that he got high before entering the bear enclosure. Then he applied for workers’ comp.
Did he get it?
What the law says
Before you decide, you should know that Montana law says: “An employee is not eligible for benefits otherwise payable under this chapter if the employee’s use of alcohol or drugs not prescribed by a physician is the major contributing cause of the accident.”
Result: Based on the grounds that his drug use was a major contributor to the accident, his benefits claim was denied — initially.
But later the man appealed to Montana’s Workers’ Compensation Court — where a judge said his use of marijuana to kick off a day of working with grizzlies was “ill advised to say the least and mind-bogglingly stupid to say the most.”
However, then the judge noted that while the man’s drug use may have been stupid, there was no evidence to conclude that it was the major cause of the incident.
The judge wrote: “Grizzlies are equal opportunity maulers, attacking without regard to race, creed, ethnicity, or marijuana usage.”
Final decision: The man gets comp.
Cite: Hopkins v. Uninsured Employers’ Fund.
Do you think it was the right decision? Share your opinion in the Comments Box below.
Tags: court, Great Bear Adventures, hopkins, judge, marijuana, Montana law, pot, uninsured employers' fund, workers comp
HRMorning.com delivers the latest HR news once a week to the inboxes of over 200,000 HR professionals.
follow us on Twitter
join our group on Facebook
June 17th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
If the worker was attacked while performing his normal job functions, albeit under the influence of marijuana, during the care and feeding of the grizzly bear, then he should be granted WC benefits.
The worker may have admitted to his employer that he got high before entering the bear enclosure, but the case does not explain how his drug use was a major contributing cause to the accident or if he provoked, touched, or harmed the bear to support reckless behavior.
June 17th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Smoking MJ was clearly not a Bonefide Occupational Qualification, but the had to show that he violated company policy and eluded supervision to beat the claim.
June 17th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Did he smoke the marijuana in vicinity of the bears, just “before entering the bear enclosure”. Maybe the second hand smoke made the bears overtly hungry, thus contributing to mauling.
I know, it is a stretch but, I think this story needed more detail. With our without the detail, it would be nice to see the work comp laws take a very strict stand on drug use in the work place and losing benefits would send the message.
June 17th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
I know someone who claims she DRIVES better after she smokes marijuana. RIGHT. I believe that anyone under the influence of either drugs or alcohol is impaired to some extent, and functions differently than when sober or straight. Drugs and alcohol also make you smell different, especially to animals who have a much more highly evolved sense of smell. Ever walk your dog? They get important “messages” from Pee-Mail, don’t they? I think the bear smelled a difference and sensed a different behavior, so responded differently. The worker should be in JAIL because unless Obama has changed that law too, usage of marijuana is still ILLEGAL in America unless you’re a cancer patient.
June 17th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Agree’s with Denise and Essie (mostly). It’s too bad there isn’t a test that can gauge the reaction time, dependably, of people who have used marijuana. Then it could be verified as a contributing cause to the injury.
From what I remember of marijuana federal law is that it is illegal to posess, illegal to traffic, but not illegal to have in your system. Medical marijuana use and sale has limitations but that’s regulated by states and not by the feds (I think) though the federal government still considers it illegal. I’m less sure of medical marijuana statutes. Regardless, if I’m correct, that means the worker wouldn’t be jailed for his drug use, but if his name was known he’d have a heck of a time finding gainful employment elsewhere.
June 17th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
While bears may be “opportunity maulers” as the judge noted, I am sure the man’s response time in departing the area would have been quicker had he not been smoking pot. I don’t think this would have been the verdict in California and believe me this state is employee friendly!
June 17th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
“An employee is not eligible for benefits otherwise payable under this chapter if the employee’s use of alcohol or drugs not prescribed by a physician is the major contributing cause of the accident.” There is only one other major contributing factor….STUPIDITY. The judge should be removed from the bench!
June 18th, 2010 at 7:00 am
The bear probably smelled the pot on the guy and got mad because he didn’t have enough to share.
The ruling does not surprize me as I have lost 2 unemployment and 1 WC claims after discharging people for failing the random and post accident screens. The UC referree/judge stated that the employee admitted smoking pot and/or snorting coke, but since it was off duty, it could not be considered willful misconduct and awarded benfits. I expect to see more of these rulings once medical MJ and decriminalizing MJ become more common.
June 18th, 2010 at 7:44 am
Perhaps the employee’s “high” impaired his ability of a prompt reaction or even noticing possible unusual behaviour of the grizzly that attacked him. I think, that regardless, he violated “An employee is not eligible for benefits otherwise payable under this chapter if the employee’s use of alcohol or drugs not prescribed by a physician is the major contributing cause of the accident.”
Unless we know exactly under what circumstances the incident happened, I believe that the employee was not entitled to 100% benefits.
June 18th, 2010 at 7:51 am
It is incredible that this guy gets workcomp. I agree with Essie, he should be in jail. The judge that made this ruling obviously has not been in the real world for a long time. This is a big part of what is wrong with our legal and political system.
June 18th, 2010 at 8:24 am
My guess is that the bear was put to sleep because he was a menace to mankind for doing what came natural to him. The stupid worker gets money. Did it ever occur to the stupid judge that just maybe the stupid worker was not performing his duties as he would have, had he not been high. So now, the stupid worker not only gets paid for coming to work high, but if he goes to jail, he gets to live off our tax money. Sounds like a case of Obamanomics to me, but then that is another kind of stupid. What a society we have become. I hope when Jesus returns, he leaves all the animals here to enjoy some peace on earth. And, maybe he will leave all the stupid people with them for food.
June 18th, 2010 at 8:38 am
Legality is not the issue. Alcohol is legal. We do need more info but if the effects of marijuana affected his capacity to judge proper job safety actions, he should not have received WC. Though I would have paid him on some type of leave, not the liability inherent in WC, thru his recovery because of the natuire of the job (feeding grizzlies might call for a “puff”).
June 18th, 2010 at 8:56 am
I think the judge ruled this correctly based on the facts in the case file. However, I wonder why no one mentioned that drug impairment can make you behave in a way that may cause a bear to attack. This is what the employer failed to prove and why he lost his case. I also think the employer was lying when he claimed that Hopkins was not an employee.
June 18th, 2010 at 10:18 am
Seriously! This is ridiculous, consistence should always be our main objective.
If the idiot left the gate open and the bear killed someone would he be responsible then?
Could the pot have impaired his judgment? The answer is Yes, that’s why they have the drug policy.
Anyone stupid enough to walk into a bear’s enclosure under the influence of anything is a danger to himself and others. He needs a mental Eval, not rehab!
By pacifying and making excesses for idiotic situations like this, we’re only keeping the door open for more ridiculous judgments like this one (Obamanomics).
The question is how much are you willing to pay for the increse in insurance premiums, leagal fees, and lets not forget OSHA for an idiot like this.
I agree with Allen, this guy should have been the appetizer and the judge desert!
June 18th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
“I hope when Jesus returns, he leaves all the animals here to enjoy some peace on earth. And, maybe he will leave all the stupid people with them for food.” ALLEN — AMEN.
June 21st, 2010 at 12:47 pm
I read this news article somewhere before seeing it here. The article included information on the “employer”. The employer did not pay into a worker’s comp account which is another issue… and this “employee” was listed as a “volunteer” that got paid cash on the side. All around, not a good situation!
June 23rd, 2010 at 9:35 am
After reading the case, the judge is absolutely correct. The reefer smoking was not the major cause; I would go so far as to presume that his use of reefer was all the time, so it would have been his normal state, not an isolated event. Grizzly bears are just very, very aggressive. I would think that a better method of feeding them would be to just throw the food over the fence. And the part where the owner tried to say that the injured man was not an employee; please. The IRS is quite specific in what constitutes an employee. Just waving a magic wand and saying “you are a volunteer” doesn’t make it so. And who should be made to pay the employees Social Security taxes? You bet; the employer!
June 23rd, 2010 at 3:09 pm
I believe anyone who is injured on the job should have a drug and alcohol test done. If they are found with any substance in their system they should not be eligible for workerscomp. Drugs and Alchol impairs your judgement and can cause accidents. He was stupid and the employer should not have to pay for it.
June 23rd, 2010 at 3:25 pm
I agree with you Dorothy. It is a well-known fact that drugs and alcohol impairs judgement and release inhibitions. The problem is the law states we have to PROVE the drugs or alcohol are the PRIMARY cause of the accident. I don’t see why we should have to prove it when it should be obvious. But the judge was required to follow the law and grant WC to the employee. In this particular case I have a hard time feeling sorry for an apparently crooked “employer”.
July 6th, 2010 at 7:56 am
If you drink alcohol or smoke marijuana or take medications you may be are able to drive a car or function on the job. However, I agree that animals are more sensitive to smells and react in differently. I can’t believe that this organization did not have written policies and procedures concerning the use of drugs, security and safety procedures on feeding animals and working around animals. Regardless of the judges ruling, this person needs to be disciplined. The consequences should have been written to all employees. If not, this organization gets what they deserve.
October 12th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
This case is unbelievable. We need to start holding people accountable for their actions. If everything I have read is true and accurate, the company needs to be punished for their safety, hiring and overall policies related to employment. I am sure that they should be audited for I-9s as well.
That being said, the worker should be fired and on his own. If a person is stupid enough to get into a cage with a wild animal after smoking pot (or doing any drug (legal or not), he/she should be held accountable for his/her actions. But our society is all about the rights of the individual over the rights of the population (where the individual is usually operating outside the law and endangering the population). God help the company that actually does something wrong or is accused of doing something wrong. There are no special interest groups to help the “Evil Corporations” in any situation because it is too easy to blame them for everything.
Our society is no longer capitalist. We are moving towards a scary version of communism where anyone who is considered to earn too much money needs to give a lot back and let it be used for people who are standing there with their hands out. I am tired of hearing about the “working man” and the evil people who make too much money. Since when do people who EARN a lot of money NOT WORK? The so called “working man” is the person who works 9-5 in a low stress environment and makes less money than most people. A lot of the “working men” (why not women by the way?) are in unions that take a lot of their money and waste it and then go out and get more money and more expensive benefits that wind up being paid for by the employer and then by the consumer in the long run.
Sorry for the discourse, but stories like this really get me hot.