[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Hey BG…just curious.
Do large fitness chains generally have language guarding against lawsuits such as these?
Who would be more at fault in a commercial gym setting, the individual doing the spotting or the actual facility? Would it be different if the individual was an employee, if so is that employee automatically protected by the gyms insurance?
I am aware that alot of gyms do not allow Dbs over a certain amount because of instances like these.[/quote]
Well, in a gym, there is usually contractual language letting the customer know that the gym will not be liable for any injuries. Simply put, any athletic endeavor comes with a risk of injury and you cannot hold someone responsible for losses due to that inherent risk.
That said, such language does not protect a gym owner from its negligence. Negligence would be along the lines of failing to inspect and maintain equipment to keep it in good working order, failing to keep the common areas free of tripping and slipping hazards, etc.
As for spotting, we all know it’s something done casually. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t come with responsibility. As someone working out at a gym, you are under no legal duty to “spot” someone, but once you assume this, you need to use reasonable care. If you do not use reasonable care, and someone is injured, in my opinion you’re at risk. Now, in real practice, we don’t see these scenarios because (1) they don’t happen frequently and, (2) the average citizen does not have enough assets to make a lawsuit against them attractive - in industry parlance, they don’t usually have “deep pockets”. And when a lawyer is taking on a speculative case, he wants deep pockets, which usually means large corporations and/or plenty of insurance coverage.
I can’t see a gym being responsible for another gym member’s negligence, but there could be exposure if the gym was aware of unsafe practices occurring and did nothing to stop it. For instance, if some jackass is trying to squat on a balance ball while another jerk off is anchoring the resistance bands LOL, and the gym is aware of it, they might have a problem. Generally though, they’d have a greater risk for some idiot injuring another patron. But in general, a gym should discourage any unsafe practice.
Employees, while acting in the course and scope of their employment only, are covered under an employer’s insurance policy. “Course and scope” is key. If the gym had a policy that forbids its staff from “spotting” customers, and they did anyway, the company, and the insurance company could argue the employee was not acting within the course and scope of his employment and that he is not covered. Practically speaking however, this is not a big risk, because no lawyer wants to target an employee with no assets and, the gym could still have risk for negligent supervision of its employees. The coverage aspect relative to an employee is usually more a nuance of technical insurance coverage practice moreso than it is a practical consideration for who pays what.
If it were me, I wouldn’t let my employees spot customers. There would be a similar risk for allowing employees to “train” customers who were not certified trainers or otherwise qualified. I’d probably let the lifter “assume the risk” of the activity and keep the employees out of it. A more extreme approach would be to, like you said, limit the exposure to danger by limiting the weights and what you will allow. We all hear the horror stories of some gyms that will not allow overhead lifting and such. Well, they are attempting to keep their exposure to any liability at a minimum.
I think the happy balance is insisting that certain lifts occur within the cage, and providing adequate cages. Squat or bench until you’re content, but do it in the cage would be my policy.
In all seriousness, it wouldn’t take much to get an expert to testify that the practice of benching is dangerous, that allowing customers to “spot” other customers is potentially dangerous and that the danger can be avoided by providing power racks or, by prohibiting it altogether.
I know it sounds extreme, but that’s where this bullshit usually always starts. Why else do you think we have all the warnings we do on the simple ladder? Because somewhere, some idiot placed it on uneven ground, and fell and broke his neck. We could literally replace the ladder example I just gave for the bench accident here and people would still shake their heads in disbelief. But the reality is, we generally have to protect the stupid and careless from themselves and each other 
LOL
