The trial court affirmed LIRC's findings. This we will not do. The legislative policy in worker's compensation cases is to limit appeals and protracted litigation in the interest of expediting justice for the employee. To that end, we will take note of LIRC's substantial expertise in this area as it routinely applies the statute and we must give due deference to this experience. Now, we move to the issue.
Case law yields a general presumption of employment for the entire duration of the employee's trip.
See id . CBS urges this court to put aside LIRC's findings and rule as a matter of law that downhill skiing is synonymous with deviating from the scope of employment. CBS argues that courts have never permitted traveling employees to indulge in risky personal recreational activities such as downhill skiing and remain within the scope of their employment. Rather, courts have regularly limited coverage to those activities such as eating, sleeping and sightseeing that are reasonably necessary or incidental to everyday existence for a traveling employee. We are not certain whether CBS is arguing that recreation per se cannot be considered an activity necessary and reasonable for everyday existence.