Frenchy's Fast Fries (3F) requires that its employees wear uniforms and protective clothing while on the job. 3F provides a locker room for the employees to leave their street clothes and personal items while working. A sign on the back of the locker room door states, "Frenchy's is not responsible for the loss of any property in the locker room." Grant, a 3F employee, changes his clothes in the locker room before starting work and leaves his wallet and watch in a pocket of his jacket hanging in his locker. When he returns after his shift, the wallet and watch are gone. Does Grant's leaving personal items in the locker room constitute a bailment? If so, what type of bailment? If not, what legal relationship is it? Does 3F's sign exculpate the company for Grant's loss? Why or why not?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Employees' storing of personal property in an employer-provided locker room, as a requirement of the job, creates a bailment. The employees deliver their personal property to the possession of the employer, in the locker room, with the intent to give up exclusive possession and control over the property while they are working. This bailment is for the mutual benefit of the bailee (the employer) and the bailors (the employees). This is the most common type of bailment and involves some benefit to each party. Here, the employees, including Grant, benefit from the use of the locker room to store their personal items. The employer, 3F, benefits from the employees' not taking their items into the work area, the employees' uniform appearance, a safer work area, and a likely decrease in accidents and injuries. In this type of bailment, the bailee is liable for ordinary negligence, or the failure to exercise ordinary care, which is the care that a reasonably prudent person would use under the circumstances. In this situation, a bailee has the right to limit his or her liability if the limit is called to the attention of the bailor and it is not against public policy. Here, the employer's exculpatory clause, on the sign on the back of the door, may be conspicuous enough to be brought to the employees' attention, but the wording is too broad. A bailee cannot exclude liability for the bailee's own negligence.