Contract that Classieo provide such insurance. The government also asserts that it has indirectly provided plaintiff with its workers compensation insurance since the cost of such insurance is implicitly subsumed in' the price of the Contract. There are no reported Court of Appeals or District Court (lecisions in the Second Circuit addressing the issue before the Court. However, The government points to four other circuits that have held workers compensation benefits to be a plaintiff’s exclusive remedy where the plaintiff suffered workplace inju ríes while working for an employer under a contract to provide the government with services and where that contract required the employer to provide workers compensation insurance. See Belluomini v. United States, 64 F.3d 299 (7th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Vega-Mena v. United States, 990 F.2d 684 (1st
holding that the united states was a statutory employer under missouri law holding that the united states was a statutory employer under kansas law holding the act inapplicable to the united states in its role as employer holding that the united states was a statutory employer under puerto rico law holding that the united states was a statutory loaning employer under illinois law