Reference no: EM131103166

Stumpy" Stumpf works in the meat department of a large unionized supermarket chain. Because he slices meat for customer orders, he is required to wear disposable gloves. One day while slicing ham for Mrs. Robinson, a regular customer, Stumpy's glove became caught in the slicer and it sliced off his ring finger and pinky. While Stumpy was being attended to at the hospital, the investigation back at the supermarket disclosed that the meat department manager had removed a protective shield that would have prevented Stumpy's fingers from being cut off. The manager explained that this was done because often the shield would 'kick back' and could injure employees who were close to the machine. On the other hand, there had been some 'near misses' when other employees had their gloves caught in the slicer.

Which of the following is most correct?

A. Stumpy will receive Workers Compensation benefits, but will not be able to seek other damages for the negligent removal of the slicing guard.
B. Stumpy will receive Workers Compensation benefits, and may be able to seek other damages from the supermarket for the negligent removal of the slicing guard.
C. Will not be eligible for Workers Compensation, because this was an intentional act by the employer, and the employer will have to pay Stumpy significant financial damages for the loss of his two fingers.
D. Stumpy will not receive Workers Compensation. He may sue the supermarket, and Mrs. Robinson will have to return the fingers she found in her package of sliced ham.