The May 17, 2023 letter involved a company driver operating a vehicle on company time between service calls. A four-car collision occurred when another vehicle traveled the wrong direction; the wrong-way motorist then exited his car, shot the driver, stole the truck, and fled. The driver did nothing to provoke the assailant, and investigation later showed the shooter was on a serial crime spree affecting the general public. The employer asked whether the shooting injury was work-related and whether unforeseeable third-party criminal acts could rebut the geographic presumption of work-relatedness.
OSHA's answer: the injury was work-related. Under 29 CFR 1904.5(a), an injury is work-related if 'an event or exposure in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition,' and a geographic presumption applies unless a specific exception in 1904.5(b)(2) fits. Work need only be 'a tangible, discernible causal factor' — no precise quantification of occupational causation is required. Because the driver was traveling between customer contacts, he was engaged in activities 'in the interest of the employer' under the travel-status rule at 1904.5(b)(6).
OSHA explained that it explicitly considered — and rejected — a violence exception during the 2001 recordkeeping rule revision. Under the 'positional theory of causation' described in the preamble, assault injuries are work-related because the assault would not have occurred absent the employee's work-required presence. OSHA's Recordkeeping FAQ 5-2 confirms that 'the Recordkeeping rule contains no general exception...for cases involving acts of violence in the work environment.' Since acts of violence are not among the 1904.5(b)(2) exceptions, the geographic presumption cannot be rebutted on that basis.
OSHA added an important caveat for employers: recording a case does not indicate employer fault, an OSHA violation, or eligibility for workers' compensation.