According to BBC News: “A French company has been found liable for the death of an employee who had a cardiac arrest while having sex with a stranger on a business trip.” No, your eyes are not deceiving you; a French Court made this decision. No information is available to know if the judges were actually sober at the time of the ruling. What were these justices thinking—that this could happen to them and they would want the court to compensate their families?
Okay, so what are the facts? The man who died was an engineer for “TSO, a railway services company based near Paris.” He was on a trip to Loiret. After work, he met a woman (maybe at a bar in the hotel where he was staying). He ended up in her hotel room. While he was thus engaged in cheating on his wife, he suffered cardiac arrest and died. This occurred in 2013. Six years later, a “Paris court ruled that his death was an industrial accident and that the family was entitled to compensation.” An “industrial accident”? Uh, he wasn’t in that industry. Nor can it be called “a workplace accident” by any stretch of the imagination.
“But under French law an employer is responsible for any accident occurring during a business trip,” judges said. Seriously? One might make a case for helping out his family if he were in a plane crash, a train wreck, or an automobile accident while traveling to or from his destination—but for something totally unrelated to his work or to transportation? If he contracted food poisoning at a restaurant and died, would that merit money for the man’s family? If he went into a small shop to buy a souvenir for his wife, and someone shot him during a hold-up, would the company have to pay for such an “industrial accident”?
The court said: “An employee on a business trip is entitled to social protection ‘over the whole time of his mission’ and regardless of the circumstances.” This is insane. It would not make much more sense if his death occurred while he was with his own wife, but in this instance, he chose an immoral action. What if he had been killed while robbing a souvenir shop? “But that’s an illegal act,” someone might protest. Oh, so engaging in immorality should be rewarded—but not illegal acts. Okay, then, what if he was struck and killed by a taxi while jaywalking? Walking is transportation, but crossing at the wrong spot is illegal. Probably rendering a decision on a matter this complex would strain the court. The point is, every sane individual knows the man did not die while engaging in work for his employer; the company is not responsible for his actions. Sometimes it appears that the only time a person will be held responsible for his behavior is on the Day of Judgment when sanity finally prevails (2 Cor. 5:10).