Which statement accurately summarizes the "assumption of risk" rule?

The accurate summary of the "assumption of risk" rule is that workers had no remedy for normal job risks before workers' compensation. This principle reflects the idea that employees who accept or continue in a job are also accepting the inherent risks associated with that job, which means they cannot seek compensation for injuries that are considered part of the normal hazards of their employment.

Historically, before the establishment of workers' compensation laws, employees had limited options for legal recourse in cases of injury. They faced challenges in proving that their employer was negligent or at fault for the injuries sustained in the course of their normal work activities. Therefore, many workplace injuries went uncompensated because they fell under the category of assumed risks.

In contrast to this correct understanding, the other statements do not reflect the nuances of the "assumption of risk" doctrine. For instance, while employers may have some liability protections from lawsuits due to the presence of workers' compensation systems, they are not completely exempt from liability in all cases. Similarly, employees still have the right to sue for specific types of workplace injuries under certain conditions, particularly if negligence can be proven. Lastly, not all risks related to employment are covered by insurance, as coverage can vary based on specific policies and statutes regarding