With the acceleration of technological advancements and the permeation of the digital transformation process into working life, more flexible working models have emerged as alternatives to traditional forms of employment. Among these models, remote working has found extensive application—particularly under the compulsory conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic—allowing employees to perform their duties in various environments without being bound to a specific workplace. Thus, a new era has commenced in modern working life in which spatial dependency has significantly diminished.
While the remote working system provides advantages for employers, such as reducing operational costs and increasing the efficiency of business processes, it offers employees a more flexible and autonomous working arrangement without attachment to a fixed workplace. Nevertheless, the widespread adoption of this model has also given rise to certain legal uncertainties and debates. Foremost among these debates is whether incidents occurring during remote work may be classified as “occupational accidents.”
Pursuant to Article 13 of the Social Insurance and General Health Insurance Law No. 5510, an occupational accident is defined as an incident that occurs:
- while the insured person is present at the workplace,
- due to the work carried out by the employer,
- during the periods when an insured employee working under an employer is sent outside the workplace on assignment and spends time without performing their principal duty,
- during the time allocated to a nursing female insured employee under Article 4/1-(a) of the Law for breastfeeding her child,
- during the commute to and from the place where the work is performed in a vehicle provided by the employer,
and which immediately or subsequently renders the insured person physically or mentally disabled.
Remote Working
Remote working constitutes a general umbrella concept encompassing various forms of employment such as teleworking, home-based work, and mobile sales representation. The distinguishing feature of this working model lies in the relative flexibility of spatial and temporal boundaries associated with the workplace. Although the employee performs their obligation to work outside the employer’s premises, the activities are conducted within a single organizational framework.
In Turkish law, remote working was incorporated into legislation through the amendment made in 2016 to Article 14 of the Labour Law No. 4857. Pursuant to paragraph four of the same article and Article 4 of the Regulation on Remote Working, remote working is defined as an employment relationship established in writing, based on the employee’s performance of the obligation to work at home or outside the workplace through technological communication tools within the scope of the business organization established by the employer.
In accordance with Article 14/6 of the Labour Law, remote workers may not, unless justified by a substantial reason, be subjected to differential treatment compared to comparable employees solely due to the nature of their employment contract. Thus, the principle of equal treatment is explicitly guaranteed. The same provision further stipulates that the employer’s obligations—taking into account the nature of the work—to inform the employee regarding occupational health and safety, to provide necessary training, to ensure health surveillance, and to take safety measures concerning the equipment supplied, remain in force.
At the international level, the first comprehensive instrument concerning home work is the ILO Convention No. 177 and Recommendation No. 184, adopted at the International Labour Conference on 20 June 1996. These instruments explicitly state that home workers are entitled to rights equal to those of workers employed at the workplace and that the provision of occupational health and safety measures is mandatory.
Under the remote working model, as in the traditional working arrangement, the employee’s duty to perform work and their subordination to the employer continue to exist. Correspondingly, the employer’s obligations to pay wages and to protect and supervise the employee also persist; the duty to take occupational health and safety measures is not eliminated.
Nevertheless, not all types of work are suitable for remote performance. Pursuant to Article 13 of the Regulation on Remote Working, remote work is prohibited in jobs involving hazardous chemical substances and radioactive materials, in activities related to the processing of such substances or their waste, and in work entailing exposure to biological agents. The purpose of this limitation is to minimize the risk of occupational accidents by ensuring that high-risk activities are conducted under controlled workplace conditions.
Occupational Accident
An occupational accident refers to incidents that occur either at the workplace or outside the workplace in connection with the execution of work, while the employee is performing their contractual duties, and which result in physical or psychological harm.
Pursuant to Article 3/1-(g) of the Occupational Health and Safety Law No. 6331, an occupational accident is defined as an incident occurring at the workplace or due to the execution of work, resulting in death or rendering bodily integrity physically or mentally impaired.
This provision demonstrates that an occupational accident is not confined to incidents occurring strictly within the physical boundaries of the workplace; incidents arising outside the workplace in connection with the execution of work may also fall within its scope. One such situation in which the performance of work takes place outside the workplace is remote working.
Occupational Accident During Remote Working
Not every incident occurring during remote working can automatically be classified as an occupational accident. The decisive criterion is the existence of an adequate causal link between the incident and the execution of work. If no legally acceptable connection can be established between the damage sustained and the performance of work, the incident cannot be characterized as an occupational accident.
In the context of remote working, determining the existence of a causal link requires a more complex assessment compared to the classical workplace model. This is because the employee operates outside the employer’s direct supervision and control, and the boundaries of the working environment appear more flexible. Such circumstances may lead to the intermingling of professional and personal activities.
For instance, if an employee is injured as a result of the explosion of a coffee machine allocated for employees’ use during working hours at the workplace, the incident would be considered an occupational accident, as it occurred within the workplace boundaries. Conversely, if a remotely working employee is injured due to the explosion of a coffee machine located in their home or another environment, classifying the incident as an occupational accident may produce unforeseeable and inequitable consequences for the employer.
Similarly, if a remote worker is injured during working hours while engaging in an activity unrelated to their obligation to perform work, such as cleaning windows, no adequate causal link can be established between the damage and the execution of work; therefore, the incident would not fall within the scope of an occupational accident.
Accordingly, not every incident occurring within a remote working environment may be regarded as an occupational accident. The specific circumstances of each case must be carefully evaluated, and it must be meticulously examined whether the damage is directly connected to the performance of work. The employer cannot be held liable for damages arising solely from the employee’s purely personal conduct.