Background
Larry Driscoll worked as a water distribution manager for the City of Cedar Rapids during the COVID-19 pandemic. The City routinely encouraged employees to be vaccinated, distributed vaccine information, allowed employees to use two hours of work time for an appointment, and provided a link to an off-site clinic. Vaccination was not required, and the City offered no financial incentive or penalty.
After receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, Driscoll developed serious autoimmune and neurological conditions that caused muscle atrophy, mobility problems, tremors, and Bell’s palsy symptoms. A deputy workers’ compensation commissioner found his injuries compensable under a standard drawn from Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, but the commissioner reversed, concluding that the proposed standard was incompatible with Iowa law and that Driscoll was not entitled to benefits. The district court affirmed.
The Court’s Holding
The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed. The majority agreed with Driscoll on one legal point: Larson’s proposed standard for voluntary vaccinations—requiring a combination of strong employer urging and some mutual benefit—does not inherently conflict with Iowa’s requirements that an injury arise out of and occur in the course of employment.
The court nevertheless declined to formally adopt that standard because Driscoll could not prevail under it. The City’s newsletters, operational updates, scheduling link, and allowance of work time amounted to routine encouragement, not “strong urging” that strongly tied the vaccination to Driscoll’s employment. The court therefore left formal adoption of the Larson standard for another case and upheld the denial of benefits.
Key Takeaways
- A voluntary vaccine reaction may potentially satisfy Iowa’s “arising out of” and “in the course of” employment requirements under a strong-urging and mutual-benefit analysis.
- Routine vaccine encouragement, paid time for an appointment, and access to an off-site clinic did not constitute strong employer urging on this record.
- The court did not formally adopt the Larson standard for voluntary vaccine injuries, leaving that question open.
Why It Matters
The decision provides Iowa employers and workers with guidance on when injuries from voluntary vaccination may be connected closely enough to employment to support workers’ compensation. General encouragement and scheduling assistance, without mandates, incentives, or penalties, may be insufficient.
Judge Sandy dissented, arguing that the court should adopt the Larson standard and remand for the commissioner to apply it. In the dissent’s view, the City’s repeated messaging, employee-only clinic access, and operational interest in vaccination could establish strong urging and mutual benefit.