Is an injury arising out of the employment?

In Madin v. Industrial Acc. Com., 46 Cal.2d 90, 94--95, 292 P.2d 892, 895, we construed the meaning of the phrase 'arising out of' the employment. There the employees, employed as 24-hour-a-day caretakers and managers were injured when a bulldozer accidentally hit their house. The bulldozer was not under the control of the employer, nor was it used on the employer's property. Because the risk of injury to the employees was increased by having to remain in proximity to the uncontrolled bulldozer as a condition of employment, we held that the injury arose out of the employment. In doing so we set forth the following rule of construction: 'Where the injury occurs on the employer's premises, while the employee is in the course of the employment, the injury arises out of the employment unless the connection is so remote from the employment that it is not an incident of it.' (Italics added.)