Which defense contends that an employee's own negligence can bar recovery from the employer?

Which defense contends that an employee's own negligence can bar recovery from the employer?

• A. Fellow Servant Rule
• B. Assumption of Risk
• C. Contributory Negligence
• D. Res Ipsa Loquitur

Answer: (C)

Contributory negligence is the defense that argues the employee’s own failure to exercise reasonable care contributed to the injury, and in many systems this can bar or reduce the employer’s liability. The idea is that if the worker was negligent themselves, there’s less or no fault left for the employer to pay for. In pure contributory negligence jurisdictions, any amount of employee fault can wipe out recovery; in many places, the rule is now practical or relative—fault is shared and recovery is reduced in proportion to each party’s negligence. This concept matters in aviation risk management because it reinforces the expectation that employees follow safety procedures and use protective equipment; if their own negligence caused the harm, the employer’s liability can be limited. The fellow servant rule focuses on liability when harm is caused by a colleague, not the employee’s own fault. Assumption of risk involves the employee knowingly accepting a hazard, which can bar recovery in some circumstances but isn’t the general idea of contributory negligence. Res ipsa loquitur involves inferring negligence from the accident itself, not a defense that bars recovery based on the employee’s own fault.

Contributory negligence is the defense that argues the employee’s own failure to exercise reasonable care contributed to the injury, and in many systems this can bar or reduce the employer’s liability. The idea is that if the worker was negligent themselves, there’s less or no fault left for the employer to pay for. In pure contributory negligence jurisdictions, any amount of employee fault can wipe out recovery; in many places, the rule is now practical or relative—fault is shared and recovery is reduced in proportion to each party’s negligence. This concept matters in aviation risk management because it reinforces the expectation that employees follow safety procedures and use protective equipment; if their own negligence caused the harm, the employer’s liability can be limited. The fellow servant rule focuses on liability when harm is caused by a colleague, not the employee’s own fault. Assumption of risk involves the employee knowingly accepting a hazard, which can bar recovery in some circumstances but isn’t the general idea of contributory negligence. Res ipsa loquitur involves inferring negligence from the accident itself, not a defense that bars recovery based on the employee’s own fault.