In Chile, the Mutual Aid Fund (Law N° 16.744) administers insurance against risks of labour accidents and professional illnesses. It is the authority competent to declare COVID-19 infection as a work-related disease. 

COVID-19 infection can only qualify as an occupational disease when there are or have been agents or factors of risk in the infected employee’s place of work that may be associated with COVID-19 infection. It is necessary to have a direct relationship between the transmission of the disease and the work or tasks performed by the employee. Employees who have been diagnosed with coronavirus will be allowed to return to work when their medical leave has ended. 

In Denmark, the Ministry of Employment has issued a guidance making it very clear that COVID-19 infection can in fact constitute an occupational illness.  

 The critical point is whether it is probable that the affected person has generally been exposed to infection during work (e.g. a nurse dealing with COVID-19 patients) or was exposed to infection for a period of time in connection with work. 

The burden of proof rests on the employee. However, it has been modified in such a way that it is sufficient if the employee is able to show that an infection risk is probable. Therefore, the nature of the work may imply a strong presumption that the employee was exposed to infection in connection with his or her work. 

The Labour Market Insurance body has now decided the first cases concerning the question of whether employees were infected with COVID-19 in the workplace and these cases have been decided in favour of the employees. 

Pursuant to the Finnish Workers’ Compensation Act ‘occupational disease’ is an illness that is likely to have developed primarily due to exposure to physical, chemical or biological agents in the workplace or in connection with work. Certain conditions must be met in order for the COVID-19 to be compensated as an occupational disease (e.g. the source of COVID-19 infection must be traced to workplace or to employee’s duties). In other words, it must be ensured that the disease did not originate from any other likely source unconnected to employees’ work. As in other countries, in Finland there could also be issues for the employee to prove causation between the COVID-19 infection and his/her work. Despite this, approximately 90 COVID-19 infections have been considered as an occupational disease by Finnish Workers’ Compensation Centre in 2020. Almost all of these cases have been identified in the healthcare industry. 

In France, a decree of 14 September 2020 states that COVID-19 can be an occupational disease, distinguishing between two situations.  

‘Acute respiratory diseases linked to a SARS-CoV2 infection’ is presumed to be of occupational origin, when the disease has been contracted in the workplace by healthcare and related personnel, laboratory, service, maintenance, administrative or social services personnel, in a home hospital environment or within the establishments and services listed in the decree. 

For other infections not contracted under these conditions, the decree entrusts the examination of these applications to a committee for the recognition of occupational diseases. 

COVID-19 can be recognised as an occupational illness in Germany in particular for healthcare workers. Three basic conditions must be met: the employee must have had contact with a person infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the course of an occupational activity, s/he must have relevant symptoms (such as coughing or fever) and be able to prove s/he has a positive PCR test.  

If the occupational illness has been recognised, the accident insurance, which is financed by the employer, will cover the costs of treatment and rehabilitation and, if necessary, the settlement of pension claims. 

Compensation and benefits for employees infected with coronavirus is also a hot topic in Hungary. According to Hungarian legislation, a COVID-19 infection counts as an occupational illness if the competent health and safety authority determines so as a result of an investigation. This will be conducted upon notification by the physician diagnosing a suspicion of occupational illness. The investigation may be carried out regarding any occupation, although it seems easier to provide effective evidence in cases concerning primarily healthcare workers and teachers. If the COVID-19 infection constitutes as an occupational illness, the infected employee is entitled to 100% sick pay, which is equal to the amount of his/her regular income.  

Under Italian law, if an employee gets COVID-19 at work this will be considered as an accident at work. The burden of proof is on the employee, who may, however, satisfy it through presumptions. This may be easier for those who carry out jobs considered at risk (e.g. doctors and people working in contact with the public).   

In the event of an accident at work, the employee will have right to an indemnity from the National Insurance against Accidents at Work Body (INAIL).  

This will not entail automatic responsibility for the employer. An employer would only be liable for damages if it is found that it violated health and safety provisions, i.e. the government and company guidelines and protocols, put in place to protect employees against COVID-19. This means that in Italy it is also crucial for employers to provide evidence that the company has adopted state–of–the–art protective measures and best practices, as per the recommendations provided for by local and international authorities. 

In Luxembourg, the coronavirus falls under code 3101 of the table of occupational illness which groups together infectious diseases. 

When an employee is infected with COVID-19, the usual procedure for recognising an occupational illness applies; no restrictions have been made due to COVID-19. 

It is up to the employee’s attending physician to complete a medical declaration of occupational illness as soon as s/he has founded suspicions that the disease has its determining cause at work. S/he sends this declaration to the Accident Insurance Association (AAA), which then approaches the employer to verify whether or not the work environment may have been the vector of infection. 

If the person has been exposed to the virus at work and/or other cases have been identified within the company, the infection will be recognised as an occupational illness. If there is really any doubt, the AAA will conduct an investigation in collaboration with the occupational doctor. 

Medical staff or those particularly exposed to similar risks of infection due to their professional activity benefit from a presumption in this matter. 

If COVID-19 infection is recognised as an occupational illness, any person infected will see all of their care be fully covered. 

At present, the AAA has declared that 74 employees benefit from the recognition of their infection with COVID-19 as an occupational illness, the majority of which concern the healthcare sector. 

In Mexico, the Social Security Mexican Institute (IMSS) is the authority in charge of providing employees’ health services, medical assistance, protection of subsistence and social services for individual and collective wellbeing, as well as granting pensions guaranteed by the Federal Government. 

Due to the spread of COVID-19 and in accordance with social security regulations, an occupational illness occurs when a disease, injury or disability derives from a cause-effect relationship with the work environment and its conditions. This is the determining factor to qualify an illness or disease as occupational, and the IMSS makes that determination. 

If an employee becomes infected with COVID-19, the IMSS may determine it is a work-related Illness. However, we do not consider this would be appropriate, since an employee’s COVID-19 infection would not occur in the exercise of their work or because of work:  it was a fortuitous event unrelated to their activities and that the company could not prevent it. 

That is why although the IMSS can presume that COVID-19 infection took place in the workplace, this has nothing to do with employees’ work and is therefore not covered by Labour Risk Insurance. 

There is an exception to the rule described above that applies to healthcare professionals, for whom IMSS may rule that COVID-19 infection is an occupational illness, by virtue of the permanent risk of infection from contact with patients with COVID-19. 

The position in New Zealand is generally determined by the government’s COVID-19 Leave Support Scheme. Eligible employers with employees who must self-isolate and cannot work because they have COVID-19 (or meet specific health criteria associated with COVID-19) can apply for a renewable two-week government subsidy for each affected employee.  Employers receiving the subsidy must pay the employee(s) at least 80% of their normal pay during the period of the subsidy, or if that is not possible, at least the subsidy amount. Any absence falling outside of the scheme is determined according to existing statutory entitlements and contractual arrangements. 

In the Netherlands, employers have a duty of care towards their employees. Employers must guarantee a safe working environment where employees’ health and safety is not at risk. The SZW Inspectorate supervises unhealthy or unsafe situations on the basis of the working conditions legislation. By not observing all rules and guidelines, employers may be at risk of violating their duty of care. This could potentially lead to liability of the employer for all damages incurred by the employees who are infected by the coronavirus. 

Occupational diseases in Peru are those generated by the functions performed by employee. In Peru, COVID-19 is only recognised as an occupational disease for health workers, since they are the ones who are most exposed to it. However, it is also very possible that employers could face claims by employees performing other duties.  

To prevent infection in the workplace, all employers must have a Plan for the Surveillance, Prevention and Control of COVID–19,. This plan must establish guidelines and directives to protect the health of all workers against COVID-19. Employers must comply with their plan and document all incidents; as well as preventive or corrective actions taken, or be able to demonstrate if the employee was negligent. 

If the company has not complied with its plan or has done so incorrectly, employers could face labour, criminal and administrative actions against them, depending on the specifics of each case. 

As in most countries around the globe, according to Russian labour legislation, maintaining occupational health and safety is an obligation for employers. Russian rules distinguish between occupational accidents and occupational diseases. Currently, COVID-19 infection is not treated as an occupational accident in Russia, since it is not directly caused by employees fulfilling their work functions. However, cases of COVID-19 infection suffered by doctors are acknowledged as an occupational disease since this is directly linked to their work with COVID-19 patients which they cannot avoid.  

There is no clear judicial practice on this issue in Russia yet, and a successful outcome of litigation recognising a COVID-19 infection as an occupational accident cannot be ruled out, particularly if the employer violates sanitary and epidemiological standards. 

Currently there is no case law on occupational exposure to COVID-19 in the UK.  To succeed in a claim for compensation against an employer for contracting COVID-19 at work, an employee would need to show that they contracted the disease at work as a result of their employer’s negligence. Given the prevalence of COVID-19 in the population at large, this will be difficult for most employees, and very difficult if the employer is taking all recommended steps to reduce the risks.    

The UK requires employers to report work-related diseases to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), a regulator with enforcement powers. HSE has clarified that COVID–19 is a reportable disease, but the reporting requirements apply only to cases of ‘occupational exposure’, that is, as a result of a person’s work.  This seems to cover employees such as laboratory technicians, nurses, other health care workers and those involved with testing etc., and has limited application to the UK workforce.