Carpooling and commuting accidents: how Home-Work Travel Plans provide insurance protection
Shared mobility has become an increasingly strategic component in Italian companies’ Home-Work Travel Plans (PSCL). Among various solutions, carpooling - sharing commutes with colleagues in a private car - stands out for its effectiveness and ease of implementation. However, this practice raises important insurance-related questions: what happens if an accident occurs during a shared commute? This crucial question, relevant to every Mobility Manager, requires clear understanding.
The Regulatory Framework for Commuting Accidents
Insurance protection for commuting accidents is governed by Art. 12 of Legislative Decree 38/2000, which covers accidents “occurring to insured persons during their normal journey between their residence and workplace”. The regulation specifies that “insurance coverage also applies when using private vehicles, provided such use is necessary”.
The concept of “necessity” regarding private vehicle use forms the interpretative foundation of the regulation. INAIL traditionally recognizes the necessity of private vehicle use in specific circumstances:
- Absence of public transport connections between residence and workplace
- Misalignment between public transport schedules and work shifts
- Significant time savings (minimum one hour per journey)
- Substantial difficulties in accessing the workplace via public transport
- Excessive distance between residence and public transport stops
Special Considerations for Carpooling
What are the implications when multiple employees share the same vehicle?
The regulatory interpretation remains ambiguous. As noted by Prof. Antonino Longo in a 2016 IPSOA article, carpooling lacks specific regulations regarding commuting accidents. This regulatory gap is particularly noteworthy considering that INAIL has historically limited compensation to journeys made on foot, by public transport, or bicycle, except when private vehicle use is deemed necessary.
However, the introduction of the Mobility Management law in 2020 added an important regulatory element that could lead to a more favorable interpretation.
Equating Carpooling with Bicycles: A New Interpretative Approach
A significant development in this field is the regulatory equivalence between carpooling and bicycles from an insurance perspective.
Law 221/2015 established a presumption of necessity for bicycles, making accidents during bicycle commutes automatically compensable, without requiring proof that public transport alternatives were unavailable.
According to recent specialist interpretation, carpooling may receive similar treatment, as both practices serve the same goal of environmental protection - a principle now reinforced by the amendment to Article 41 of the Constitution.
The key to establishing this equivalence lies in formally incorporating carpooling into the company’s Home-Work Travel Plan.
Leveraging the Home-Work Travel Plan for Insurance Protection
The formal inclusion of carpooling in the PSCL represents the critical element in ensuring comprehensive insurance coverage for employees. To maximize this protection, the plan must clearly specify the parameters and limitations of carpooling arrangements.
As Giovanni Piglialarmi notes in the ADAPT Bulletin of May 22, 2023, “environmental protection could serve as the ‘legal foundation’ for reinterpreting the concept of a ‘normal work journey’ in relation to carpooling. This aligns with recent jurisprudential perspectives that evaluate journey ‘normality’ in light of broader ‘legal system values,’ which necessarily include environmental protection”.
The article further emphasizes that “employees of companies with mobility plans incorporating carpooling should receive mandatory insurance protection for commuting accidents, provided the plan specifies usage parameters (such as passenger limits, approved platforms, cost allocation, and required employer authorizations). For these cases, the same presumption of necessity applied to bicycles could extend to carpooling”.
Public Transport: The Standard for Personal Mobility
It’s crucial to note that, beyond specific protections for carpooling, Italian law recognizes public transport as the primary means of personal mobility. The Supreme Court of Cassation, in ruling 22670/2018, definitively established that “public transport represents the standard means of personal mobility and entails the lowest degree of road risk exposure”.
For Mobility Managers, this jurisprudential stance provides concrete regulatory support for sustainable mobility initiatives. The clear hierarchy established by the Supreme Court (prioritizing public transport over private vehicles) creates a defined framework for corporate mobility management strategies. Incorporating these principles into the PSCL not only enhances regulatory compliance but also provides a solid foundation for discouraging single-occupancy vehicle use. This approach guides employees toward collective transportation solutions that not only reduce environmental impact but also ensure enhanced safety and protection in case of accidents.
Paolo Barbato is the CEO and co-founder of Wiseair, a company that specializes in data-driven decision making solutions for sustainable mobility and air quality management.