Yes, they can deny it. That does not mean the denial is right.

In Connecticut, the basic rule is ugly and simple: ordinary commuting usually is not covered by workers' compensation.

But travel between job sites often is.

That distinction is where nursing home attendants get screwed.

If you work in Greenwich and your employer had you going from one facility, wing, satellite building, training location, or assigned patient-related site to another, the trip may count as part of your job instead of a normal drive to work. And if the electrical burns happened because exposed wiring at that second site injured you when you arrived or while you were entering to do assigned work, the employer's insurance carrier does not get to wave the word "commute" around like a magic spell.

The real fight is whether this was your commute or their errand

This comes up all the time in Fairfield County because nobody's day is neat.

A nursing home attendant might clock out of a morning assignment, get told to cover another building, pick up supplies, attend mandatory in-service training, or help at a related property across town. In Greenwich, that can mean bouncing from a facility near King Street to another stop closer to Greenwich Avenue, or cutting through I-95 traffic because the Merritt is jammed and nobody cares that your "quick trip" now takes 40 minutes.

The insurance carrier will try to shrink the facts.

They'll say you were just on your way to work. They'll say you hadn't started yet. They'll say the site was not your regular location. They'll say you were coming from home, from lunch, or from a personal errand.

Your side of this is more concrete:

• Who told you to go there
• Whether you were already on the clock or expected to be paid for travel
• Whether this second location benefited the employer
• Whether going there was required, not optional
• Whether the burn happened as you entered, signed in, unlocked, or began assigned duties

That second-work-site exception matters a lot in Connecticut.

If your employer directed the travel, or the travel was part of the service you were providing, the claim gets much stronger.

Electrical burns make the medical record matter fast

Electrical injuries are not just skin burns.

That is where a lot of claims go off the rails.

You can have entry and exit wounds, nerve damage, muscle injury, heart rhythm issues, headaches, vision problems, numbness, weakness, and later pain in the hands, shoulders, or back. For a nursing home attendant, that can wreck lifting, turning patients, charting, gripping rails, and doing transfers.

If the exposed wiring knocked you back, made you fall, or caused confusion, that matters too.

The first records need to say "electrical burn" or "electrocution injury," not just "burn" or "minor contact." If you were treated at Greenwich Hospital, Stamford Hospital, or urgent care near the Post Road, the wording in those early notes can decide whether the carrier treats this like a serious workplace injury or a nuisance claim.

And yes, insurers absolutely read those notes like prosecutors.

Connecticut employers love the parking lot argument

Here's another thing most people do not realize.

Sometimes the injury happens right outside the building, in a loading area, maintenance corridor, temporary construction zone, or side entrance. The employer then says you were not really "at work" yet.

That argument gets weaker if the employer sent you there and the area was part of the route employees were expected to use.

Construction at care facilities makes this worse. Temporary wiring, extension runs, open panels, and contractor messes create exactly the kind of hazard that leads to an electrical burn claim and then a blame game. The nursing home says the contractor did it. The contractor says the property owner controlled the area. The workers' comp carrier says you were commuting.

Meanwhile, your hands are blistered and your arm feels like it's humming.

If there were two employers, things get messier

A lot of attendants in lower Fairfield County work through staffing agencies, float pools, or related entities under one corporate umbrella. One name is on the paycheck. Another name is on the building. A third company manages the site.

That matters because the correct workers' comp insurer depends on who employed you for that assignment.

If one company sent you to a second site, that company may still be on the hook even if the injury happened on property controlled by somebody else. A separate claim against the property owner or contractor may also exist, because workers' comp and third-party liability are not the same thing.

That is where the carrier starts hoping you get confused and miss the trail.

What helps prove this was job travel in Greenwich

The best evidence is boring.

Text messages from a supervisor telling you to report to the second site. Schedule apps. timeclock entries. badge swipes. staffing emails. parking records. mileage reimbursement requests. notes showing you were covering a shift shortage. If you drove from one assigned location to another because the employer needed coverage, that is not the same as driving from your apartment to your normal shift.

And in Greenwich, the route can help tell the story. If you were moving between two care-related sites during the workday and got snagged in I-95 traffic by Exit 3 or diverted off the Merritt because of a crash, that still does not magically turn work travel into personal commuting.

Connecticut claims turn on purpose.

Why were you on that road, at that time, going to that place?

If the answer is "because the employer sent me," the denial starts looking a lot weaker.

The other trap: delayed symptoms

Electrical burn claims get disputed even harder when you do not look catastrophically injured that same day.

Then 48 hours later your grip is worse, your shoulder locks up, your sleep is shot, and your heart starts racing. The carrier will say that later problems are unrelated.

That is bullshit when the mechanism of injury is electrical exposure.

For a nursing home attendant, even modest nerve damage can mean you cannot safely transfer a resident or catch somebody who is falling. That is not a side issue. That is the job.

If the claim was denied because "you were commuting," the central question is not whether you were in a car before the injury. Plenty of workers were. The real question is whether you were traveling as part of your employer's business to a second assigned work site in Greenwich. If you were, workers' comp coverage is still very much in play.