A fitness instructor who was hit by a cyclist while taking a walk between shifts has been denied a workers’ compensation payout despite arguing she was out exercising to stay “mentally and physically prepared” for her duties.

Allison Priolo sought cover after suffering a traumatic brain injury, a broken neck and cheekbones, and a dislocated shoulder in the accident in April last year.

But her claim for workers’ compensation – arguing she was injured during a journey while carrying out duties of employment – was rejected by ReturnToWork SA later in the year.

She then took her case to the SA Employment Tribunal.

The 49-year-old had overseen a 7am Pilates class at the YMCA at Scotch College in Adelaide and took her walk along streets nearby during a 30-minute unpaid window before her next session at 8.30am.

Before setting off, she stored her equipment bag in her car, parked on a road outside the college. The accident happened after she retrieved it for her next lesson.

Ms Priolo – who had taken up the job the previous month – told the tribunal she was unaware there were lockers for staff to store belongings, so used her vehicle.

She added that the gym she worked in was cold and she took the walk to ensure she was warmed up for her next class.

“It was my preference to go for a walk rather than attending the school cafe or stay in the studio, so that I could stay warm,” she told the tribunal.

Lawyers for Ms Priolo told the tribunal the YMCA’s code of conduct required her to ensure she was ready to start work and to “devote all [her] time and attention while at work to the business of YMCA”.

They said that requirement – plus a directive for workers to take reasonable care for their own health and safety and ensure good mental and physical health – put the walk “within the scope of undertaking duties of employment”.

In his ruling on the case, Judge Mark Calligeros said: “It was ... put to Ms Priolo that she could have conducted the 8.30am class without the need to walk beforehand given the gap between the end of the 7am class and the start of the 8.30am class was only 40 minutes.

“Ms Priolo disagreed. She said that she knew how her body operated and did not want to risk injury by cooling down before the 8.30am class.”

The judge found the walk qualified as a “journey” under the Return to Work Act, but said the employer could not be held liable for her injuries.

“While there were work-related reasons to undertake the walk, they do not rise to a sufficient level so the walk can be described as being undertaken in the course of carrying out duties of employment.”

He said she “exercised a preference to go for a walk” when other options to remain warm and limber – such as sitting in an indoor pool area – were available.

The tribunal confirmed the decision to deny a payout. See the ruling here.