In Rosen v. Industrial Acc. Com. (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 748, an apartment tenant and his wife agreed with their landlord to perform certain minor services on the premises on a part-time basis, in addition to the husband's regular work elsewhere, in return for a nominal credit allowance on their rent. The husband was injured while descending a stairway at the apartment building on his way to run a personal errand. (Id. at pp. 748-749.) The Industrial Accident Commission found that because the tenant's duties contemplated he live on the premises in order to enjoy the benefits of his rental allowance, his apartment was the equivalent of a bunkhouse, and the bunkhouse rule dictated that he was injured in the course of employment. (Id. at p. 750.) The Court of Appeal reversed, finding that neither "the theory nor the philosophy underlying the development of the bunkhouse rule would warrant its application ..." in that case. (Rosen v. Industrial Acc. Com., supra, 239 Cal.App.2d at p. 750.) It agreed with the landlord "that it is unreasonable and beyond the contemplation of the Workmen's Compensation Act to hold that an agreement between a landlord and his tenants whereby a modest rental allowance is given the tenants in return for certain relatively nominal services creates a situation in which the landlord must furnish, in effect, a completely comprehensive health, accident and life insurance policy covering the tenants 24 hours a day so long as they are upon the premises." (Id. at p. 750.) It reasoned that 4 in prior instances in which the bunkhouse rule had been applied, the employee was expected or required to reside on the employer's premises by virtue of the employment relationship, and the "landlord-tenant relationship was entirely subsidiary and collateral to the basic employment relationship." (Ibid.) But in a situation such as that present there, the basic relationship being that of landlord and tenant with the tenant being employed full time in other pursuits and merely rendering relatively minor services to the landlord, the bunkhouse rule did not govern. (Id. at p. 751.)